{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4213", "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": 4213, "subject": "Women; Incomprehensible Three", "messages": 4, "voices": 4, "first": "2003-09-09T18:30:18+00:00", "last": "2003-09-09T19:16:29+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Sikozu Johnson", "address": "sikozujohnson at cox.net" }, "date": "2003-09-09T18:30:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Women; Incomprehensible Three", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On Mardi, sept 9, 2003, at 11:00 US/Pacific, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote: \n[Interrupting: As someone once added, \"The whole damn thing \nincomprehensible.\"]\n\n'The Incomprehensible Three' sounds like a jazz group.\n\nIncidentally, to those who comment that Buddhism is confusing and \nmystical, I usually reply by asking them questions about the Trinity \nuntil such time as I am able to throw my hands in the air and say, \"You \nthink BUDDHISM is incomprehensible?!?\" I figure they asked for it.\n\nOn a third note, there was some discussion before about women in Wolfe. \nWell, I must say that while I adore Wolfe, I find his \nCrypto-Catholicism and anti-feminism irritating. I have never met the \nman and can only stand in awe of his brilliant writing, but no one is \nperfect and sometimes he is boring or annoying: \"Dorpspraak like Yoda \nannoying for hundreds of pages is\" - or just angrymaking.\n\nOn women, he is angrymaking to me, if I may half-Dorp. His narrators so \nconsistently paint a world in which women are either divine or divine \nbitches, and always incomprehensible, is very very aggravating. Long \nSun and Short Sun beg for a half-decent female character who isn't \ncrap. General Mint doesn't count, she is the virgin Joan of Arc, beyond \nhumanity in person.\n\nThat's my opinion, held after rereading the books a few times. The \nwomen are stomach-churningly idolised or jammed in the mud, and the \n'good men' casually rape, murder and kill.\n\nAnyway, I'm sure many will disagree, but as a woman that's what I got \nout of them. Not to say I don't adore them but Wolfe is clearly tied in \nknots about women somewhere and it comes out plain and clear to me.\n\nOf course, my idea of a fun time is reading \"Hothead Paisan\", so take \nit with a grain of salt. ;-)\n\nSikozu\nhttp://sikozu.blogspot.com/\nhttp://members.cox.net/sikozujohnson/\n******\n\"I sit for world revolution\"\nAlan Ginsberg, 19 July 1981" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "katbarx at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2003-09-09T18:42:44+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Women; Incomprehensible Three", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sikozu writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That's my opinion, held after rereading the books a few times. The women \nare stomach-churningly idolised or jammed in the mud, and the 'good men' \ncasually rape, murder and kill." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, of course, one might argue that this is the point - his \"good\"\nmen are stomach-churning, hellish people also. One and all - as near\nas I can tell - his narrators are in desparate need of salvation. Even\nthose, like Silk and Severian, who bring it." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2003-09-09T19:16:29+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Women; Incomprehensible Three", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "...there was some discussion before about women in Wolfe.\nWell, I must say that while I adore Wolfe, I find his\nCrypto-Catholicism and anti-feminism irritating...His narrators so\nconsistently paint a world in which women are either divine or divine\nbitches, and always incomprehensible, is very very aggravating. Long\nSun and Short Sun beg for a half-decent female character who isn't\ncrap. General Mint doesn't count, she is the virgin Joan of Arc, beyond\nhumanity in person.\n\nThat's my opinion, held after rereading the books a few times. The\nwomen are stomach-churningly idolised or jammed in the mud, and the\n'good men' casually rape, murder and kill." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, as Horn said, you saw what you saw, but using the Long Sun as an\nexample, I have come to a much different conclusion.\n\nWolfe takes the stock stereo-types and puts them through facinating twists.\n\nRose is initially portrayed as your typical rudas, but then as the story\nprogresses we find she's a much more complex and ironic character. Mint is\nyour typical wilting virginal child, but in Calde we find that she is no\nchild; she's in her late 30s and is deeply questioning her choice of\nvocation ~ like her mythological namesake she is literally being seduced by\nDeath. She's hardly defined by her virginity. If anything (like all the\nsibyls) she exhibits all three aspects of Grave's White Goddess ~ sacred\nvirgin, killing nymph, and cthonic prophecying underworld bride of Death.\n\nSiyuf is a termagant, but the leadership of Viron *and* Trivigaunte are\ndeliberately revolting characters. The Trivigaunte officers are competent,\nprofessional, and sympathic characters. Furthemore, IMO the twisted nature\nof Trivigaunte culture represented by Siyuf is intended as a foil to have\nthe reader to take note of the irrationality and cruelty of the machismotic\nculture of Viron and Typhon's Urthly city.\n\nAnd what of Chenille? What of Marble negoticiating for Silk's release with\nthe Ayuntamiento, her crippling guilt, and her heartbreaking societal\nplight? I contend that even Hyacinth is a more complex character than she is\ngenerally credited as being.\n\nI've yet to see a \"good man\" in Wolfe's major novels. They are all\nambiguous, frighteningly wounded men.\n\n~ Crush" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2003-09-09T18:58:32+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Women; Incomprehensible Three", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hmm. Here I always thought that the Trinity would be something a Buddhist or \nHindu would have a much easier time understanding than your average western \nChristian. Not to say that the understanding reached would be better, but it \nwould seem at least to come more naturally.\n\nNot sure what you mean on the Dorpspraak - it goes on for a little while, \nbut I've not seen him use something like that for hundreds of pages. Side \nnote: your mileage may vary, but I found the dialog between Oreb and the \ncatachrest to be far more annoying and difficult to follow.\n\nWolfe's women have been commented on fairly extensively here, so I won't \ndrag the whole thing out again. But I think you may already have an answer \nin what you said toward the end there. I can't think of any character, male \nor female, in any Wolfe book I have read that is more \"stomach-churningly \nidolized\" than Silk (which is not to say that he doesn't have his flaws). \nAnd his other male protagonists? Flawed, sometimes deeply so - in some cases \noutright brutal. Does this indicate that Wolfe has issues with men?\n\nI don't dislike most of Wolfe's female characters - in fact, many of them I \nlike better than Wolfe's male protagonists - though it's true that some of \nthem are just not very strong. I don't find that too bothersome, but what \n*does* bother me is the kind of male-female relationships he sets up. But \nthat's another story, and one best left to archive-browsing.\n\n-- Civet\n\nSikozu said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Incidentally, to those who comment that Buddhism is confusing and mystical, \nI usually reply by asking them questions about the Trinity until such time \nas I am able to throw my hands in the air and say, \"You think BUDDHISM is \nincomprehensible?!?\" I figure they asked for it.\n\nOn a third note, there was some discussion before about women in Wolfe. \nWell, I must say that while I adore Wolfe, I find his Crypto-Catholicism \nand anti-feminism irritating. I have never met the man and can only stand \nin awe of his brilliant writing, but no one is perfect and sometimes he is \nboring or annoying: \"Dorpspraak like Yoda annoying for hundreds of pages \nis\" - or just angrymaking.\n\nOn women, he is angrymaking to me, if I may half-Dorp. His narrators so \nconsistently paint a world in which women are either divine or divine \nbitches, and always incomprehensible, is very very aggravating. Long Sun \nand Short Sun beg for a half-decent female character who isn't crap. \nGeneral Mint doesn't count, she is the virgin Joan of Arc, beyond humanity \nin person.\n\nThat's my opinion, held after rereading the books a few times. The women \nare stomach-churningly idolised or jammed in the mud, and the 'good men' \ncasually rape, murder and kill.\n\nAnyway, I'm sure many will disagree, but as a woman that's what I got out \nof them. Not to say I don't adore them but Wolfe is clearly tied in knots \nabout women somewhere and it comes out plain and clear to me.\n\nOf course, my idea of a fun time is reading \"Hothead Paisan\", so take it \nwith a grain of salt. ;-)\n\nSikozu\nhttp://sikozu.blogspot.com/\nhttp://members.cox.net/sikozujohnson/\n******\n\"I sit for world revolution\"\nAlan Ginsberg, 19 July 1981\n\n\n--" } ] } ] }