Subject: (urth) Lexicon Urthus

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:11:18 +0000

What is the status of Michael "mantis" Andre-Driussi's ''Lexicon Urthus''? 

Does anyone know?  Sirius Fiction has it listed as AWOL- no copies
left, no fixed or second editions planned, and no second printing ever
planned.  Ebay hosts one copy (for a absolute minimum of a cool 105
US$) , Abebooks demanding 150 $US, and Amazon (as many of us know) has
one reseller offering it at an exorbitant price.  In short, ''Lexicon
Urthus'', with its narrow, deep focus, aimed at a narrow audience
(itself selected out of a narrow audience!) appears as dead as a
doorknob commercially, and Andre-Driussi appears to have moved on; in
essence abandonware, or somewhat like an orphaned work:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphaned_works

Now, what interests me here is not that I won't be able to get a copy
(unless someone has tired of theirs), but rather the long-discussed
FAQ for this list. Seems to me that LU could be a pretty good basis
for it- would dispose of the entire genre of vocab -based questions at
a shot (once corrected, that is).  But there is the problem of
copyright. (Drat! You knew there was a catch!).

I was not active on this list when mantis was, nor have my occasional
trawls through the archive (is it just me, or are the archive digests
broken? http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v212.shtml gives me a 404.)
really revealed much of mants' personality to me.
Is it within the realm of possibility that he might release LU under
the GNU Free Documentation License:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html

or possibly a Creative Commons
http://creativecommons.org/

license such as this one:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
(non-commercial, share-alike, generic jurisdiction)

or this one:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/
(Allow commercial, share, generic jurisdiction)

Or, god willing, public domain?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

So what do y'all think? Is this worth pursuing?

~Maru

---

From: mournings glory <mourningsglory at hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:27:56 +0000

>Does anyone know?

>>From 
http://lists.urth.net/htdig.cgi/urth-urth.net/2004-December/000159.html:

"Michael Andre-Driussi confirms LEXICON URTHUS will probably appear as a 
Print On Demand title
in the next 'year or three'."

(Nick Gevers was the poster.)

msg

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:50:03 +0000

> (Nick Gevers was the poster.)

Well, that's not perfect, but still not a fatal error; 'year or
three', sounds, as you emphasize, like he doesn't really care and is
in no particular hurry.
Besides, one could make an argument that online copies would not
cannibalize a print-on-demand edition. At least for me, physical text
is superior to bits, and worth paying for.

~Maru

---

From: mournings glory <mourningsglory at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:26:19 +0000

Adding yet another paragraph to the following sequence:

>Print On Demand title in the next 'year or three'."

>three', sounds, as you emphasize, like he doesn't really care and is

I'm assuming one of the publishing arms of John Gregory Betancourt's Cosmos 
Books will be doing the POD of _Lexicon Urthus_ (they did the Crowley 
critbook edited by Mr. Andre-Driussi and Ms. Turner) and that any delay in 
it being scheduled is more likely due to their workload than any alleged 
indifference of the sorely-missed mantis.

(On a Crowley note, anyone read _Lord Byron's Novel_ yet? It's next on my 
list. But when-oh-when is _Endless Things_ coming out?)

msg

---

From: Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:44:54 +0000

I passed along the recent queries about LEXICON URTHUS to the author. Here
is what he had to say:
***************************************************
>What to tell the List:
>
>The lexicographer is working on the Lexicon.
>
>All the corrections (and most of the additions) of AE& series and
>NS-1 are going into it.
>
>In addition, all the named characters.
>
>It will most likely be a print on demand book.
>
>No release date as yet.  Probably a year or two away.
>
>In the meantime, for those who need the information and cannot wait,
>signed and numbered photocopies (spiral bound ) of the Lexicon are
>available for $24 plus shipping (in US $3 media mail, $6 Priority
>Mail).
>
>Thank you for your interest in Sirius Fiction.
>
>=Michael=
****************************************************

-Roy

---

From: pthwndxrclzp <aquastor at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:08:01 +0000

Woo-hoo! That is *excellent*, both short-term and long! 

Hey, Civet -- are you reading this? <grin>

On 7/22/05, Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

---

From: Chris <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:37:36 +0000

This is indeed good news, although I am more interested in the long term 
(expanded, corrected version) than in the short term (I am not *quite* 
fanatical enough to spend $30 on spiralbound photocopies just to have it 
right this second).

Someone mentioned Doctorow, and there's certainly something to be said for 
that kind of publishing in principle, but to throw in my two cents: just 
because it works for one person (and in one genre) doesn't mean it will for 
another. Doctorow's expected audience is not the same as that of LU, even if 
there is some overlap. One has to respect the author's knowledge of his 
field and his audience; if he doesn't want to distribute on the same model 
as Doctorow it is because his *professional* opinion that it isn't for the 
best.

That said, I think the *availability* of an electronic format opens up 
enticing possibilities when it comes to Wolfe's work and the related 
materials. The ability to make citations and to look up vaguely-remembered 
counterpoints makes a huge difference in the kind of arguments we have here.

Actually even though I love paper books and insist on having physical copies 
of the books I love, a serious argument could be made that the lasting 
*value* I'd get out of an electronic version would be at least as much, or 
more, than I'd get out of the paper version.

---

From: Maru Dubshinki <marudubshinki at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 20:40:18 +0000

> more, than I'd get out of the paper version.

Amen! This is the sort of thing I was trying to say, but I was afraid
would come out sounding all wrong.  But Doctorow shows that it works
sometimes; we don't know for sure whether a reference would work- but
has anyone tried?  Nor can I say for sure that making LU electronic
would boost sales (Wikipedia is an obvious reference example, but it
is explicitly nonprofit, so not useful. But it certainly illustrates
that communities can grow up around reference works, and that
volunteers will give their time to improving a common reference.), but
I can definitely assert that a LU online would be far superior to any
POD edition, just on the amount of people who would be able to access
it, to say nothing of further improvements  such as being able to link
entries, it being much more current, error fixes a lot faster, and if
in a wiki, community-improvable.

~Maru