{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3894", "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": 3894, "subject": "Hyacinth Not A Boy", "messages": 4, "voices": 3, "first": "2003-03-12T02:31:07+00:00", "last": "2003-03-14T05:18:46+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh Geller", "address": "dclxvi at dclxvi.best.vwh.net" }, "date": "2003-03-12T02:31:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Hyacinth Not A Boy", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Che Monro wrote:\nPerhaps those who see more clearly can help me with a little detail that I\nhave worried loose and wish to see where it leads, if anywhere?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In Return to the Whorl Silk seems to have a song on his mind a lot it goes\nin part (like this):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "These young girls live to deceive you,\nSad experience teaches me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I wish I knew what the tune was like so that I could try filking this song.\nI bet that Gene Wolfe had a tune in mind." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Mostly, however, I wonder what deception the girl in the song was\npracticing. Could it be that the girl was really a boy dressing up and\ndeceiving the singer?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "When I met Gene Wolfe at the last WorldCon, I mentioned this theory to\nhim, and that there were people who supported it on this mailing list.\n\nHis response - which was not in any way ambiguous - was to say \"It is\nprobably a good thing that I am not on that mailing list.\".\n\nIt is importamnt to keep in mind the fact that every story has at least\ntwo authors.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2003-03-13T14:27:43+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Hyacinth Not A Boy", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Regarding the \"male hyacinth\" theory, Josh Geller said:\nWhen I met Gene Wolfe at the last WorldCon, I mentioned this theory to\nhim, and that there were people who supported it on this mailing list.\n\nHis response - which was not in any way ambiguous - was to say \"It is\nprobably a good thing that I am not on that mailing list.\".\n\nIt is importamnt to keep in mind the fact that every story has at least\ntwo authors.\n\n\nCrush responds:\nThat's an unambiguous answer? Well, maybe for Wolfe it is. Less so, I'd say,\nthan \"Urth is green,\" and you know how far that has gotten us. I've never\nspoken to Wolfe, but based on his answers to direct questions from this\nlist, I recommend all beware of \"unambiguous\" answers from that Delphic\noracle.\n\nAs I said recently, I no longer hold to this theory for purely thematic\nreasons. However, IF I were **what some consider to be** a purely \"text\nevidence\" reader...\n\n(that is, to presume:\no All characters are telling the truth\no No characters are wrong in observations\no All things are as they are presented\no Ignore extra-textual plot-lines regardless of how closely they may seem to\nfollow the story\nunless the narrator says otherwise)\n\n...then, I would still hold this theory.\n\nSince every story, as you say, \"has two authors\", that is true even when the\nreader decides he will only read into the text the literal meaning of every\nword. Since no original author can write that way (language and story being,\nin part, metaphors), to read in such a way changes the text as well.\n\nKeeping this law \"in mind\", does not deliver the reader from it, but it can\nfool a reader into thinking he has -- like a man who dreams he has awoken\nfrom a dream.\n\n-- Crush" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh Geller", "address": "dclxvi at dclxvi.best.vwh.net" }, "date": "2003-03-13T15:53:52+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Hyacinth Not A Boy", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, James Wynn wrote:\nRegarding the \"male hyacinth\" theory, Josh Geller said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "When I met Gene Wolfe at the last WorldCon, I mentioned this theory to\nhim, and that there were people who supported it on this mailing list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "His response - which was not in any way ambiguous - was to say \"It is\nprobably a good thing that I am not on that mailing list.\"." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It is importamnt to keep in mind the fact that every story has at least\ntwo authors." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Crush responds:\nThat's an unambiguous answer?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The words might perhaps be ambiguous.\n\nHis manner, vocal tone and body language made it unambiguous.\n\nThis is why I was careful to add the words between the - -." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Well, maybe for Wolfe it is. Less so, I'd say,\nthan \"Urth is green,\" and you know how far that has gotten us." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That one is perfectly clear, I think." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " I've never\nspoken to Wolfe, but based on his answers to direct questions from this\nlist, I recommend all beware of \"unambiguous\" answers from that Delphic\noracle." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Perhaps you should, then.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Charles Reed", "address": "jazzy_jeeves at att.net" }, "date": "2003-03-14T05:18:46+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Hyacinth Not A Boy", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Just a couple of thoughts about \"text-evidence\" readers:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Crush responds:\nThat's an unambiguous answer? Well, maybe for Wolfe it is. Less so, I'd say,\nthan \"Urth is green,\" and you know how far that has gotten us. I've never\nspoken to Wolfe, but based on his answers to direct questions from this\nlist, I recommend all beware of \"unambiguous\" answers from that Delphic\noracle.\n\nAs I said recently, I no longer hold to this theory for purely thematic\nreasons. However, IF I were **what some consider to be** a purely \"text\nevidence\" reader...\n\n(that is, to presume:\no All characters are telling the truth" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A \"text evidence\" reader would hold no such view if the text indicated \nthat the character were lying or speaking something false out of ignorance." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "o No characters are wrong in observations" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Same comment. If the text shows that a character is wrong in his \nobservations, then that's what it shows. If there is no textual \nevidence for a character's observations being wrong, though, then the \n\"text evidence\" reader would accept such statements as true. It's a \ngenerally positive view of humanity, I suppose, to believe what a \ncharacter says until proven (proven by the text) otherwise, but I find \nthat such an outlook serves me well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "o All things are as they are presented" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Now you're verging on slandering those of us who prefer to analyze the \ntext on its own merits first and foremost. We're very much aware that \nmany things are not as they are presented, and that we must dig deep and \nthink hard -- about the text -- to figure out what's really going on \nbehind the \"false presentation.\" Just because we don't rush out to see \nhow Wolfe's work aligns with Robert Graves or with some \nGreek/Egyptian/Whatever myth, that doesn't mean that we're lazy readers, \nor that we don't think deeply about what's going on. It also doesn't \nmean that we're accepting of every bit of drivel that happens to come \nfrom the narrator's pen as God-ordained absolute truth. You're painting \nwith a recklessly broad brush, Crush, and I hope that you're at least \nmostly kidding." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "o Ignore extra-textual plot-lines regardless of how closely they may seem to\nfollow the story unless the narrator says otherwise)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is the only accurate \"text-first\" characterization that you've made.\n\nCharles" } ] } ] }