{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5408", "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": 5408, "subject": "Wolfe in decline?", "messages": 5, "voices": 4, "first": "2009-04-14T17:06:29+00:00", "last": "2009-04-15T12:26:29+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Kieran Mullen", "address": "kieran at nhn.ou.edu" }, "date": "2009-04-14T17:06:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe in decline?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Sorry to omit previous discussions....\n\n I don't think Wolfe jumped the shark with Pirate Freedom. I \nthought that it was an interesting story as well as an exploration of \ngood and evil in a much more violent world. The narrator is \nunreliable, of course as most are in Wolfe. It seems silly to state \nthat involving time travel immediately implies a poorIy written \nstory. I even liked the Wizard-Knight series. I found \"The FIfth \nHead of Cerberus\" to be unenjoyable - the story too thin and the \nnarrative layers too complex.\n\n As for \"An Evil Guest,\" I didn't like it because it wandered all \nover the genre map, so that it seemed incoherent. The Lovecraftian \nelements were pulled out in the end without enough foreshadowing, and \nI could not find a character with whom I could empathize. However, I \nthink I need to reread it based on some insights brought up by this \nmailing list. It's a bit like seeing \"Rosencrantz and Guilderstern \nare Dead\" without any knowledge of Shakespeare. You can admire \nparts of it, but it seems a bit incoherent. I am still looking for \nsome key understanding that will make AEG make more sense.\n\nKieran Mullen" } ] }, { "message_id": "<37bfbeb60904141031w5120359ahb65faf6c7a6db35d@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Jonathan Goodwin", "address": "joncgoodwin at gmail.com" }, "date": "2009-04-14T17:31:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe in decline?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That would be silly about the time-travel, I agree, so I'm glad not to\nhave suggested it. What I did write was that time-travel aspect of PF\nseemed a particularly 'Wolfean' addition to the book, one conditioned\nby the expectations of his earlier work and not integral to the\nnarrative. In particular, I wrote in my post that it seems to\nintroduce (lazily) potential ambiguities for readers inclined to spot\nthem that would thereby increase the apparent moral and narrative\ncomplexity of an undeveloped work.\n\nI also mentioned in my post the nagging suspicion I had that the\nentire pirate story was a fantasy transformation of a youth spent in\nmore prosaic and chronologically suitable crime. Did anyone else see\nit this way? I also then thought that I would never even have\nconsidered such a baroque interpretation in a work by another writer\n(and would have indeed set the book down long before finishing it).\nThat kind of reaction, if shared by anyone here at all, is what I'm\nparticularly interested in hearing about." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Kieran Mullen wrote:\n\n? Sorry to omit previous discussions....\n\n? I don't think Wolfe jumped the shark with Pirate Freedom. — I thought that\nit was an interesting story as well as an exploration of good and evil in a\nmuch more violent world. — The narrator is unreliable, of course as most are\nin Wolfe. ? ?It seems silly to state that involving time travel immediately\nimplies a poorIy written story. ?I ?even liked the Wizard-Knight series. — I\nfound \"The FIfth Head of Cerberus\" to be unenjoyable - the story too thin\nand the narrative layers too complex.\n\n? ?As for \"An Evil Guest,\" ?I didn't like it because it wandered all over\nthe genre map, so that it seemed incoherent. — The Lovecraftian elements\nwere pulled out in the end without enough foreshadowing, and I could not\nfind a character with whom I could empathize. — However, I think I need to\nreread it based on some insights brought up by this mailing list. — It's a\nbit like seeing \"Rosencrantz and Guilderstern are Dead\" ?without any\nknowledge of Shakespeare. — You can admire parts of it, but it seems a bit\nincoherent. — I am still looking for some key understanding that will make\nAEG make more sense.\n\nKieran Mullen\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<20090415115316.E68214800A@diego.dreamhost.com>", "from": { "name": "Mo Holkar / UKG", "address": "lists at ukg.co.uk" }, "date": "2009-04-15T11:53:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe in decline?", "in_reply_to": "<37bfbeb60904141031w5120359ahb65faf6c7a6db35d@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 18:31 14/04/2009, Jonathan Goodwin wrote:\nI also then thought that I would never even have\nconsidered such a baroque interpretation in a work by another writer\n(and would have indeed set the book down long before finishing it).\nThat kind of reaction, if shared by anyone here at all, is what I'm\nparticularly interested in hearing about." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I had this reaction with AEG: the feeling \"But this is Wolfe! Surely \nthere must be more to it than this!\" Particularly as it had been \nbilled on Lovecraftian-horror elements which didn't really appear to \nbe present in any significant way.\n\nThere are quite a few of the earlier works that I didn't fully 'get' \nat the first time of reading, so that bred in me the suspicion that \nif I didn't make much of a work, there probably was something clever \ngoing on that I hadn't picked up on. But those are recognizable by \nthe \"ah, of course\" sensation when you do eventually spot it, or see \nit explained by someone else. I have had no such sensation yet with AEG.\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki:\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/ " } ] }, { "message_id": "<1846.72.171.0.143.1239798161.squirrel@brunians.org>", "from": { "name": "brunians at brunians.org", "address": "brunians at brunians.org" }, "date": "2009-04-15T12:22:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe in decline?", "in_reply_to": "<20090415115316.E68214800A@diego.dreamhost.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Although I question it sometimes, I am mostly still going with the theory\nthat Gene has deliberately written a book which appears on the surface to\nbe a bad pulp story but has more going on beneath the surface.\n\nIn the beginning of Chapter Seven, Gideon is soliliquizing about how much\nhe loves Cassie and how important she is to him, and how he will always\nlove her. This is all, in the light of how he behaves later, total\nbullshit.\n\nSo what is going on here? Gideon is doing magick: he is programming\nhimself to believe certain things which he does not actually believe, but\nwhich he must appear to believe to that the daemon that he has evoked so\nthat that daemon will behave in the ways he wants her to behave.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 18:31 14/04/2009, Jonathan Goodwin wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I also then thought that I would never even have\nconsidered such a baroque interpretation in a work by another writer\n(and would have indeed set the book down long before finishing it).\nThat kind of reaction, if shared by anyone here at all, is what I'm\nparticularly interested in hearing about." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I had this reaction with AEG: the feeling \"But this is Wolfe! Surely\nthere must be more to it than this!\" Particularly as it had been\nbilled on Lovecraftian-horror elements which didn't really appear to\nbe present in any significant way.\n\nThere are quite a few of the earlier works that I didn't fully 'get'\nat the first time of reading, so that bred in me the suspicion that\nif I didn't make much of a work, there probably was something clever\ngoing on that I hadn't picked up on. But those are recognizable by\nthe \"ah, of course\" sensation when you do eventually spot it, or see\nit explained by someone else. I have had no such sensation yet with AEG.\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki:\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<2529.72.171.0.143.1239798389.squirrel@brunians.org>", "from": { "name": "brunians at brunians.org", "address": "brunians at brunians.org" }, "date": "2009-04-15T12:26:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe in decline?", "in_reply_to": "<1846.72.171.0.143.1239798161.squirrel@brunians.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "So what is going on here? Gideon is doing magick: he is programming\nhimself to believe certain things which he does not actually believe, but\nwhich he must appear to believe to that the daemon that he has evoked so\nthat that daemon will behave in the ways he wants her to behave." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "s/to believe to that the/to believe to the/\n\na bit of overediting, sorry.\n\n\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At 18:31 14/04/2009, Jonathan Goodwin wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I also then thought that I would never even have\nconsidered such a baroque interpretation in a work by another writer\n(and would have indeed set the book down long before finishing it).\nThat kind of reaction, if shared by anyone here at all, is what I'm\nparticularly interested in hearing about." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I had this reaction with AEG: the feeling \"But this is Wolfe! Surely\nthere must be more to it than this!\" Particularly as it had been\nbilled on Lovecraftian-horror elements which didn't really appear to\nbe present in any significant way.\n\nThere are quite a few of the earlier works that I didn't fully 'get'\nat the first time of reading, so that bred in me the suspicion that\nif I didn't make much of a work, there probably was something clever\ngoing on that I hadn't picked up on. But those are recognizable by\nthe \"ah, of course\" sensation when you do eventually spot it, or see\nit explained by someone else. I have had no such sensation yet with AEG.\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki:\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] } ] }