{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5786", "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": 5786, "subject": "Padding?", "messages": 6, "voices": 5, "first": "2010-11-30T11:16:20+00:00", "last": "2010-11-30T20:01:42+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<451456.67501.qm@smtp817.mail.ird.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Mo Holkar", "address": "lists at ukg.co.uk" }, "date": "2010-11-30T11:16:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hi all,\n\nOne of Wolfe's comments in the Cooney interview, \nlinked here recently, caught my eye. Re BotNS:\n\n\"If you look in the third book, you will find a \nstorytelling contest that’s strictly padding. \nThat contest got me a really good review in \nPlayboy Magazine — and I’ve always been grateful to it for that reason.\"\n\nI have always seen the storytelling contest as \nnarratively and thematically important. We step \nback from the main action, and get a succession \nof insights into the metaphysics of the \ncharacters' world. We then read on with somewhat renewed eyes.\n\nI guess we can continue to believe that Wolfe is \nbeing a little disingenuous when he says it's \n\"strictly\" padding. But it is slightly sobering \nto reflect that if BotNS had remained a trilogy, \nit wouldn't have been included.\n\nAlthough perhaps you may feel that this is post \nhoc reasoning, and really it is indeed padding \nthat we could have done happily without?\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/ " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-11-30T12:14:44+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": "<451456.67501.qm@smtp817.mail.ird.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I suspect he did indeed add it as 'strictly' a means of padding out the\nstory, but that in the writing of it he (consciously or unconsciously) made\nit a crucial element to the whole BotNS as you suggest. And yes, I'm sure\nhe's being deviously modest and facetiously flippant as his pleasure at its\nfavourable review shows." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Mo Holkar wrote:\nHi all,\n\nOne of Wolfe's comments in the Cooney interview, linked here recently,\ncaught my eye. Re BotNS:\n\n\"If you look in the third book, you will find a storytelling contest that’s\nstrictly padding. That contest got me a really good review in Playboy\nMagazine — and I’ve always been grateful to it for that reason.\"\n\nI have always seen the storytelling contest as narratively and thematically\nimportant. We step back from the main action, and get a succession of\ninsights into the metaphysics of the characters' world. We then read on with\nsomewhat renewed eyes.\n\nI guess we can continue to believe that Wolfe is being a little\ndisingenuous when he says it's \"strictly\" padding. But it is slightly\nsobering to reflect that if BotNS had remained a trilogy, it wouldn't have\nbeen included.\n\nAlthough perhaps you may feel that this is post hoc reasoning, and really\nit is indeed padding that we could have done happily without?\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<148D85D1-7B55-4770-A93F-ECC4C6A05EAF@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-11-30T17:31:54+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": "<451456.67501.qm@smtp817.mail.ird.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wait, Isn't the storytelling contest in the fourth book, in the Lazaret?\nI feel that stuff is obliquely relevant, but mostly padding. I can barely stand that contest in the Lazaret.\n\n~Mike" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Nov 30, 2010, at 3:16 AM, Mo Holkar wrote:\nHi all,\n\nOne of Wolfe's comments in the Cooney interview, linked here recently, caught my eye. Re BotNS:\n\n\"If you look in the third book, you will find a storytelling contest that’s strictly padding. That contest got me a really good review in Playboy Magazine — and I’ve always been grateful to it for that reason.\"\n\nI have always seen the storytelling contest as narratively and thematically important. We step back from the main action, and get a succession of insights into the metaphysics of the characters' world. We then read on with somewhat renewed eyes.\n\nI guess we can continue to believe that Wolfe is being a little disingenuous when he says it's \"strictly\" padding. But it is slightly sobering to reflect that if BotNS had remained a trilogy, it wouldn't have been included.\n\nAlthough perhaps you may feel that this is post hoc reasoning, and really it is indeed padding that we could have done happily without?\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/ \n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<734805.96684.qm@web37605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2010-11-30T18:02:30+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": "<148D85D1-7B55-4770-A93F-ECC4C6A05EAF@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It seems like there are different ways to take it.\n\nWhen I first read it, I thought, \"And here's Wolfe deciding to be 'literary.' \nLet's stop the 'quest-adventure' and do some thematic ruminating!\"\n\nAfter I got more interested in the world of Urth, it seemed like perfectly \nappropriate \"world building\" stuff. It was almost generically appropriate.\n\nThen, even later, when I was interested in the cultural/religious aspects of \nUrth, it seemed like a series of interesting philosophical digressions.\n\nLooking back now, it was probably Wolfe doing some of all of that. It seems \nperfectly appropriate that the original STORY could have done without it. And my \nbet is that when Wolfe was originally writing the thing, he was thinking \nprimarily as a professional genre writer would: I have my story, and now I have \nto add to it because my editor/publisher wants more. I don't want to screw up \nthe plot I've laid out, so how can I add to this appropriately in a way that \nwon't require all kinds of plot-level restructuring?\n\nSo it probably was padding, in terms of word count. But a good writer will still \nmake padding add to the overall work, which I think this does. It certainly \ninterrupts the \"forward movement\" of the story (and maybe we can fault it for \nthat...Wolfe even seems to, and I can understand how the \"storyteller\" in him \nmight be a bit irritated with those passages), but it still contributes to Urth. \nI wouldn't want to do without it, myself, just as I wouldn't want to do without \nany of the other Brown Book stories (and still want more!).\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Tue, November 30, 2010 11:31:54 AM\nSubject: Re: (urth) Padding?\n\nWait, Isn't the storytelling contest in the fourth book, in the Lazaret?\nI feel that stuff is obliquely relevant, but mostly padding. I can barely stand \nthat contest in the Lazaret.\n\n~Mike" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Nov 30, 2010, at 3:16 AM, Mo Holkar wrote:\nHi all,\n\nOne of Wolfe's comments in the Cooney interview, linked here recently, caught \nmy eye. Re BotNS:\n\n\"If you look in the third book, you will find a storytelling contest that’s \nstrictly padding. That contest got me a really good review in Playboy Magazine ? \nand I’ve always been grateful to it for that reason.\"\n\nI have always seen the storytelling contest as narratively and thematically \nimportant. We step back from the main action, and get a succession of insights \ninto the metaphysics of the characters' world. We then read on with somewhat \nrenewed eyes.\n\nI guess we can continue to believe that Wolfe is being a little disingenuous \nwhen he says it's \"strictly\" padding. But it is slightly sobering to reflect \nthat if BotNS had remained a trilogy, it wouldn't have been included.\n\nAlthough perhaps you may feel that this is post hoc reasoning, and really it is \nindeed padding that we could have done happily without?\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/ \n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4CF53F73.7090503@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-11-30T18:16:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": "<734805.96684.qm@web37605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote (30-11-2010 18:02):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "(...) And my bet is that when Wolfe was originally writing the thing, he\nwas thinking primarily as a professional genre writer would: I have my\nstory, and now I have to add to it because my editor/publisher wants\nmore. I don't want to screw up the plot I've laid out, so how can I add\nto this appropriately in a way that won't require all kinds of plot-level\nrestructuring?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Iinm NS was to be a trilogy, but then the third volume was promising to get\ntoo big, so it had to be split. Then yes, some padding may have been needed\nto fatten one of the resulting volumes." } ] }, { "message_id": "<5EDFE3F6-9D04-4430-BF09-15EE4A0EF3A2@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-11-30T20:01:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Padding?", "in_reply_to": "<734805.96684.qm@web37605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think all that is very apt, Brewer.\nAnd as I wrestle with each sentance of this book, I ultimately find the stories rewarding.\nJust last friday night, I came home from work to an empty house, my family out of town becaude they had the day off when I didn't. Suddenly Halvard's story, which I previously had no use for, became very relevant. What a monster I would be without my family to keep me on the path. \nAs Ava says:\n\"Like the man your friend talked about, most men think they make their homes for their families, but the fact is that they make both homes and families for themselves.\n\n~witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Nov 30, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nIt seems like there are different ways to take it.\n\nWhen I first read it, I thought, \"And here's Wolfe deciding to be 'literary.' \nLet's stop the 'quest-adventure' and do some thematic ruminating!\"\n\nAfter I got more interested in the world of Urth, it seemed like perfectly \nappropriate \"world building\" stuff. It was almost generically appropriate.\n\nThen, even later, when I was interested in the cultural/religious aspects of \nUrth, it seemed like a series of interesting philosophical digressions.\n\nLooking back now, it was probably Wolfe doing some of all of that. It seems \nperfectly appropriate that the original STORY could have done without it. And my \nbet is that when Wolfe was originally writing the thing, he was thinking \nprimarily as a professional genre writer would: I have my story, and now I have \nto add to it because my editor/publisher wants more. I don't want to screw up \nthe plot I've laid out, so how can I add to this appropriately in a way that \nwon't require all kinds of plot-level restructuring?\n\nSo it probably was padding, in terms of word count. But a good writer will still \nmake padding add to the overall work, which I think this does. It certainly \ninterrupts the \"forward movement\" of the story (and maybe we can fault it for \nthat...Wolfe even seems to, and I can understand how the \"storyteller\" in him \nmight be a bit irritated with those passages), but it still contributes to Urth. \nI wouldn't want to do without it, myself, just as I wouldn't want to do without \nany of the other Brown Book stories (and still want more!).\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Tue, November 30, 2010 11:31:54 AM\nSubject: Re: (urth) Padding?\n\nWait, Isn't the storytelling contest in the fourth book, in the Lazaret?\nI feel that stuff is obliquely relevant, but mostly padding. I can barely stand \nthat contest in the Lazaret.\n\n~Mike\n\nOn Nov 30, 2010, at 3:16 AM, Mo Holkar wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Hi all,\n\nOne of Wolfe's comments in the Cooney interview, linked here recently, caught \nmy eye. Re BotNS:\n\n\"If you look in the third book, you will find a storytelling contest that’s \nstrictly padding. That contest got me a really good review in Playboy Magazine ? \nand I’ve always been grateful to it for that reason.\"\n\nI have always seen the storytelling contest as narratively and thematically \nimportant. We step back from the main action, and get a succession of insights \ninto the metaphysics of the characters' world. We then read on with somewhat \nrenewed eyes.\n\nI guess we can continue to believe that Wolfe is being a little disingenuous \nwhen he says it's \"strictly\" padding. But it is slightly sobering to reflect \nthat if BotNS had remained a trilogy, it wouldn't have been included.\n\nAlthough perhaps you may feel that this is post hoc reasoning, and really it is \nindeed padding that we could have done happily without?\n\nbest wishes,\n\nMo\n\n\n# ~ # ~ #\n\nWolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/ \n_______________________________________________" } ] } ] }