{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4828", "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": 4828, "subject": "Castleview and Arthuriana", "messages": 4, "voices": 2, "first": "2007-05-08T20:54:36+00:00", "last": "2007-05-17T02:44:16+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<20070508205436.37069.qmail@web36914.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2007-05-08T20:54:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Castleview and Arthuriana", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "(A bit of a long one, but after teaching Malory not\nlong ago *and* having reread it along with some\nstudents, I thought I'd share some of my\nquestions/ideas.)\n\nI know there have been many questions in the past\nabout what exactly happens at the end of Castleview.\nIn the archives, the two most compelling versions were\nthat 1) the whole Arthurian “good vs. evil” turns out\nto be just a pagan renewal of seasons (with King\nGeimhreadh — Gaelic “winter” — killing the Green Man\n“to die so that you and many another may live”) or 2)\nthat it’s a mysterious battle between Faeries which\nmortals don’t and can’t really understand (and a lot\nof the confusion is therefore mortal confusion on\nperceiving the “feckless” fey).\n\nBut I’m not sure the pagan renewal story goes far\nenough, and the Arthurian resonances seem strong\nenough that “vague battle” of Faeries can be tied to\nthe prophetic future of the Arthur myths more\nstrongly. Much of the end suggests to me that we’re\nwitnessing some kind of larger battle between forces\nfor which Arthur’s coming is necessary. But I’m not\nsure that we’ve actually seen that final battle yet,\nand my real opinion is that the book is really about\nchanging what we thought the Arthurian myths are\n“really” about.\n\nI’m still not exactly sure what that “really” is, or\nwhy these groups of Faeries were after each other. I’m\nnot even sure, to be honest, whether both sides were\n“Faerie.” \n after all Dr. von Madadh seems to be on\nsome kind of anti-Faerie side, not only by saying that\nhe and “his people” have been searching for a way into\nFaerie for a long time, but also by his battle cry\n(after I assume he kills Shields) that “The king is\ndead and the world lives! The end is not yet!”\nMorgan’s voice then calls out —\nand will live again!?\nSo do we have some kind of anti-Faerie forces\n(although perhaps still magical\n— Or even alien see\nbelow?) behind Dr. vM? One side gains from killing\nArthur and having the “world” live on after him, the\nother for keeping his return a promise. Is this still\nan Arthurian dynamic or something incredibly\ndifferent?\n\nBut as for the Arthur figure, is Shields really\nArthur? Or is he the Fisher King (who seems strikingly\nabsent from the book)? Or maybe (the idea I rather\nlike) he’s one of many Arthurs. (Further, his name is\n“Sheilds,” not “swords,” and he never uses\nExcalibur\nGawain is the only knight predominantly\nassociated with his shield.) Yes, Morgan says he’s her\nbrother. But Wrangler’s name is “Artie,” and, in the\ncar on the way back, Bob Richards suggests that\nWrangler should have been their champion, but he was\ntoo hurt at the moment. Thus, Shields stood in his\nplace. (“They asked us to pick out a champion,\nremember” The best we had. So we sent Mr. Shields.\nThat cowboy?s still pretty weak; so’s Seth, and Seth’s\ntoo young, anyhow\n?). Further, Seth ends up with\nExcalibur (or the “alien” sword). Does this make him\nSir Bedivere or, for that matter, the Lady of the\nLake? Or is he another Arthur? (Would that make Tom\nHoward the Uther and Sally the Igraine? If so, then\nDr. vM by perhaps “marrying” Igraine at the end,\nbecomes King Lot King who will, with Igraine, give\nbirth to Gawain, Mordred, and two other G knights\n(?)\nafter all, Seth does wonder “what his half\nbrothers and sisters might be like, if there were\nany.” And, early in the legends, Lot is Arthur’s\nenemy, although he’s later his ally.)\n\nWhat intrigues me, however, is how much Arthurian\nmaterial doesn’t seem to be here: the Grail? A grail\nknight (Galahad/Percival)? A Lancelot? A Gawain? An\nUther? A Merlin? A Fisher King? A Dolorous Stroke?\nI’ve always wondered with this book if I’ve been shown\nenough of the Arthurian myth that the rest is supposed\nto be there as well. I’m still not sure. I am\nreasonably sure that we’re in a world where the\nmysteries won’t be solved just by mapping characters\nonto the old tales. The many Arthur suggestion is one\nreason. Another is how the legend of the Wild Hunt\nchanges: any mortal, particularly women, who view it\nare supposed to die or be killed. But Phyllis Sun “had\nwitnessed the Wild Hunt and lived.” So are we still in\na world in which Arthur is a champion and Camelot is\nan ideal?\n\nI’m always torn with this one whether to agree with\nthe idea that the “mysteriousness” is just part of\ninteracting with Faerie or whether there’s enough from\nmyth/folklore to piece together a bigger narrative.\nBut the clues never seem coherent enough as the Sun\nbooks to piece together more than speculations.\n\n(And Excalibur as technology from a planet that was\ndestroyed where the asteroid belt is now? I like the\nidea that we see Faerie either as Indians (Sally’s\nneighbor) or sasquatches/yetis, or aliens depending on\nour cultural imagination. But that was Morgan telling\nJudy, who apparently can see Faeries as they really\nare, about the extraterrestrial sword? Are we seeing\nthrough “mortal” or ?fey? perception there? So is the\n“truest” version of this that we’re in some kind of\nX-Files battle of extraterrestrial forces? Ugh\nIf so,\nthen I have no idea what to make of what I’ve read. ;D\n )\n\nAh, well. I'd love hashing some of this stuff out if\nanyone's game for returning to an older one (although\nwith new Latro and TWK still new, there's still plenty\nof fresh fodder as well).\n\n-Craig" } ] }, { "message_id": "<001201c791ff$a0da5660$09cb5a42@rclackey.stic.net>", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2007-05-09T06:02:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Castleview and Arthuriana", "in_reply_to": "<20070508205436.37069.qmail@web36914.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote:\nWhat intrigues me, however, is how much Arthurian" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "material doesn’t seem to be here: [. . .] I’ve always wondered with this\nbook if I’ve been shown enough of the Arthurian myth that the rest is\nsupposed to be there as well. I’m still not sure. I am reasonably sure that\nwe’re in a world where the mysteries won’t be solved just by mapping\ncharacters onto the old tales.<<\n\nI am delighted that you see it that way. On that point I am certain that you\nare correct. Wolfe *never* retells an old story quite the way he heard it.\nNot only is much of the Arthurian material missing, there is a lot of stuff\nin the story that has nothing to do with Arthur. Ghosts, vampires and other\nthings from folklore and legend are all tangled up." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Ah, well. I'd love hashing some of this stuff out if" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "anyone's game for returning to an older one (although\nwith new Latro and TWK still new, there's still plenty\nof fresh fodder as well).<<\n\nIt's been a few years since I last read the book, so I'm not as prepared as\nI might be. But I've always liked -- even preferred -- Wolfe's \"mid-Western\"\nnovels. Have at it. Not incidentally, it is encouraging to see longish,\nthoughtful posts such as this. They are all too few and far between.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "<000e01c797f0$08924f60$9cca5a42@rclackey.stic.net>", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2007-05-16T19:25:53+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Castleview and Arthuriana", "in_reply_to": "<001201c791ff$a0da5660$09cb5a42@rclackey.stic.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've read the book again." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote:\nI know there have been many questions in the past" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "about what exactly happens at the end of Castleview.\nIn the archives, the two most compelling versions were\nthat 1) the whole Arthurian “good vs. evil” turns out\nto be just a pagan renewal of seasons (with King\nGeimhreadh — Gaelic “winter” — killing the Green Man\n“to die so that you and many another may live”)<<\n\nWell, that is certainly part of it; snow immediately began to fall and,\nafter the battle, Wrangler/Arthur spoke to Lisa Solomon about how things\nwould be better in the spring. He then proposed that they be married in the\nspring. Does that make the young Jewess a type of Guinevere? I doubt it. Why\nthe hell was the Green Man riding Odin's horse? What does the Green Man have\nto do with the Wild Hunt?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "or 2)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "that it’s a mysterious battle between Faeries which\nmortals don’t and can’t really understand (and a lot\nof the confusion is therefore mortal confusion on\nperceiving the “feckless” fey).<<\n\nA lot of the confusion is due to Wolfe mixing mythologies. \n\n[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "But as for the Arthur figure, is Shields really" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Arthur?<<\n\nYes and no." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Or is he the Fisher King (who seems strikingly" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "absent from the book)? Or maybe (the idea I rather\nlike) he’s one of many Arthurs. (Further, his name is\n“Sheilds,” not “swords,” and he never uses\nExcalibur\nGawain is the only knight predominantly\nassociated with his shield.) Yes, Morgan says he’s her\nbrother. But Wrangler’s name is “Artie,” and, in the\ncar on the way back, Bob Richards suggests that\nWrangler should have been their champion, but he was\ntoo hurt at the moment. Thus, Shields stood in his\nplace.<<\n\nYes, Wrangler was weak from loss of blood -- it was autumn. But the brother\nthat Morgan spoke to Judy of (244), the one she kept trying to kill, was\nWrangler. (Lucie drawing out his blood in the Jeep; Hwan with a knife at the\nhospital at Morgan's direction.)\n\nBesides, the trouble at the camp started well before Shields came to town.\nWrangler was the general object of those attentions. The phantom castle had\nbeen around for about a century before either man was born. Wrangler's\nfamily had been involved one way or another with the castle for generations." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "(“They asked us to pick out a champion," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "remember” The best we had. So we sent Mr. Shields.\nThat cowboy?s still pretty weak; so’s Seth, and Seth’s\ntoo young, anyhow\n?). Further, Seth ends up with\nExcalibur (or the “alien” sword).<<\n\nOnce the battle began, Seth tossed Excalibur to Wrangler. It's not clear\nthat Wrangler ever used it; he made more use of his brother's forty-four.\nThe battle ended almost as soon as it began. Back at the camp, Wrangler\nstored the sword in the bottom of his brother's old trunk-- minus the\nscabbard.\n\nThe Malory quote at the front of the book said that the scabbard was more\nvaluable than the sword because it was a specific against loss of blood. In\nthe epilogue, the empty scabbard hung above Shields' oceanic bed. The\nscabbard had done (if Shields was truly the \"dead\" king Dr. vM spoke of),\nand would do, neither man any good unless or until it was reunited with the\nsword." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Does this make him" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sir Bedivere or, for that matter, the Lady of the\nLake? Or is he another Arthur? (Would that make Tom\nHoward the Uther and Sally the Igraine? If so, then\nDr. vM by perhaps “marrying” Igraine at the end,\nbecomes King Lot King who will, with Igraine, give\nbirth to Gawain, Mordred, and two other G knights\n(?)\nafter all, Seth does wonder “what his half\nbrothers and sisters might be like, if there were\nany.” And, early in the legends, Lot is Arthur’s\nenemy, although he’s later his ally.)<<\n\nI don't think the analogy can be carried that far. I don't know why Sally\nwould have let the doctor into her bed, or why Seth was accepting of it,\nparticularly if he intended to pursue Shields' daughter. Merc couldn't have\nthought well of the being who had killed her father.\n\nAnd exactly what kind of being was the doctor? What sort of dog/wolf could\ntake the form of a man? And who or what was the large \"wild-eyed, riderless\nhunter\" who followed the Green Man into the courtyard (273)? A favored hound\nfrom the Huntsman's pack?\n\n[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I’m always torn with this one whether to agree with" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "the idea that the “mysteriousness” is just part of\ninteracting with Faerie or whether there’s enough from\nmyth/folklore to piece together a bigger narrative.\nBut the clues never seem coherent enough as the Sun\nbooks to piece together more than speculations.<<\n\nThe Arthurian material has been too distorted and tangled up with other\nstuff. How did Lucie come to die and receive a Catholic funeral (224)? Was\nshe buried with a stake through her heart? Who found her body and where? Are\nwe to believe that a comatose Sancha killed her in fairyland? Lisa and\nWrangler seemed pleased at the end that the formerly dead Sancha had come\nback to life. Were they in for future grief? Or was Sancha, though\napparently a real vampire (unlike wannabe Lucie?), on their side?\n\nWhat has the ghost of a dead Jim Long to do with Morgan? How does Wrangler's\nmissing brother Bart fit into the Arthurian family?\n\nThe literal fall of Excalibur to Earth from a destroyed planet has no place\nat all in Arthuriana (245). But Fee's true form seems to be that of an alien\n(262). Messy.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "<137685.46429.qm@web36908.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2007-05-17T02:44:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Castleview and Arthuriana", "in_reply_to": "<000e01c797f0$08924f60$9cca5a42@rclackey.stic.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Roy,\n\nI’m so glad you took another look at the book (and at\nmy ideas). The more I think about it, the more I agree\nthat the jumbled mythologies are so “messy” that it\nmay not be fruitful to try to untangle them all.\nHopefully, that confusion is the point in this case,\nthat “Faerie” in all its forms is mysterious.\nOtherwise, I feel either that I’m not that great a\nreader of this book or that Wolfe created something\noverly tangled." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Why the hell was the Green Man riding Odin's horse?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "What does the Green Man have to do with the Wild" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hunt?\n\nGreat questions (and typical, I think). I know that\nsome versions of the Wild Hunt associate it with the\ncoming of a great person’s death, so perhaps it’s the\ndeath of Spring/Green Man?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "A lot of the confusion is due to Wolfe mixing\nmythologies. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Indeed. My question now is what to make of those\nmixes, either in general or in particular instances." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Besides, the trouble at the camp started well before\nShields came to town. Wrangler was the general object\nof those attentions. The phantom castle had been" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "around" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "for about a century before either man was born.\nWrangler's family had been involved one way or\nanother\nwith the castle for generations." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "All this seems right. Does that mean, then, that when\nDr.vM and Morgan yell about kings, they’re talking\nabout different ones? She’s talking about Wrangler and\nthe Dr.vM is talking about Shields?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Once the battle began, Seth tossed Excalibur to\nWrangler. It's not clear that Wrangler ever used it;" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "he" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "made more use of his brother's forty-four. The battle\nended almost as soon as it began. Back at the camp,\nWrangler stored the sword in the bottom of his\nbrother's old trunk-- minus the scabbard." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I thought Seth had it at the end. (I don’t have my\ncopy with me here.) But that was why I wondered if he\nwas to be another Arthur figure." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The Malory quote at the front of the book said that\nthe scabbard was more valuable than the sword because\nit was a specific against loss of blood. In the\nepilogue, the empty scabbard hung above Shields'" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "oceanic bed. The scabbard had done (if Shields was\ntruly the \"dead\" king Dr. vM spoke of), and would do,\nneither man any good unless or until it .was reunited\nwith the sword." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Good point. Getting the sword and scabbard back\ntogether again is a different kind of mythological\nfuture than Arthur returning for the glory of\nEngland?\nCastleview? Something else?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And exactly what kind of being was the doctor? What\nsort of dog/wolf could take the form of a man? And" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "who" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "or what was the large \"wild-eyed, riderless hunter\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "who" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "followed the Green Man into the courtyard (273)? A\nfavored hound from the Huntsman's pack?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Perhaps. But then he also claims to be from a society\nthat seems rather set on discovering (and quelling?)\nsupernatural occurrences. So he’s either\nanti-?supernatural? (which is obviously wrong) or in\nsome antagonistic faction\nbut antagonistic to\nwhat/whom?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The Arthurian material has been too distorted and\ntangled up with other stuff." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I’m starting to think that’s true. It makes some of\nthe Arthurian material seem, if not a red herring, at\nleast occasionally misleading in its broader\nimplications." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The literal fall of Excalibur to Earth from a\ndestroyed planet has no place at all in Arthuriana\n(245). But Fee's true form seems to be that of an\nalien(262). Messy." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And it’s with the aliens that I want to throw up my\nhands (or treat it as some master key, which I have\ntrouble with as well).\n\nSo\nno mysteries solved but more questions raised. If\nwe come to think that this book is essentially\nknotted, that at least does give a very interesting\ncounter-example to the common notion that all of\nWolfe’s “puzzles” can be solved by discerning readers.\nIt also makes me question whether some of the puzzles\nin the other works are supposed to remain so. That\nsaid, it raises some other interesting questions about\nthe literary merit of “puzzles” like this: what\npurpose(s) do they serve when they are solvable and\nwhen they are opaque. After all, puzzles and ambiguity\nhave very different interpretive consequences.\n\nAgain, thanks for taking the time to reread the book\n(and my earlier post)!\n\nCraig\n\n\n\n " } ] } ] }