{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5884", "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": 5884, "subject": "Truth in fiction", "messages": 10, "voices": 6, "first": "2011-01-07T20:40:18+00:00", "last": "2011-01-08T15:34:18+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andrew Mason", "address": "andrew.mason53 at googlemail.com" }, "date": "2011-01-07T20:40:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Lee Berman wrote:\nAs Jane says, this is fiction! It is not possible for there to be a \"right\" answer. There is no objective reality\nto measure. Ideas are not found in dots on a page or screen. Ideas are not floating around in the aether either. They\nONLY to be found as neural patterns in each human being's brain. And as long as one intelligent, sane person has a certain\nidea, that idea has validity." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There is no such thing as the truth about what actually happened on\nSainte-Anne, etc., but there can be a truth which is relevant to the\ndiscussion; the truth about what the author meant and intended us to\nsee. That is a fact about what happened in some human being's brain.\nThere isn't always such a truth; perhaps he intended it to be\nambiguous; perhaps he just didn't think about some question. But\nsometimes there is. You need not take an interest in it if you don't\nwant to, but I think many of us here do care about it.\n\nI think it's clear that _sometimes_ Wolfe has a particular answer in\nmind, and not all these cases are obvious. John V. Marsch is a good\nexample; from Wolfe's own testimony he not only intended that Marsch\nhad been replaced by an abo, but expected us to work it out. Yet in\nfact the matter was disputed. In such cases it surely makes sense to\ntry to work out what the answer is, and compare theories and consider\ntheir advantages and disadvantages.\n\nNot every case need be the same. In fact, Wolfe's behaviour in\ninterviews suggests they aren't; sometimes he gives perfectly\nstraighforward answers to questions that were doubtful, even adding\ncomments along the lines of 'How did you not get that?' other times he\nrefuses to answer or remains cryptic, suggesting that these are things\nto which there isn't meant to be a clear answer.\n\nNow, there are presumably other cases where Wolfe has a definite\nanswer in mind, but hasn't told us it, because it never came up. In\nsuch cases we may never know for certain what the answer is. But still\nthere is an answer, which the author intends us to discover, so\ndebating it still makes sense. This doesn't seem very puzzling to me;\nin all sorts of fields answers can't be known for certain, but some\nanswers are more plausible than others, and there are reasons for\naccepting or rejecting them.\n\nThe real problem, of course, is that we can never know which are the\ncases where there is a definite answer and which are the cases where\nthere isn't.So we may be going on wild-goose-chases some of the time.\nI don't see an solution to this." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2011-01-07T21:07:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Andrew Mason: There is no such thing as the truth about what actually happened on\nSainte-Anne, etc., but there can be a truth which is relevant to the\ndiscussion; the truth about what the author meant and intended us to\nsee. That is a fact about what happened in some human being's brain.\nhere isn't always such a truth; perhaps he intended it to beambiguous; \nperhaps he just didn't think about some question. But\nsometimes there is. You need not take an interest in it if you don't\nwant to, but I think many of us here do care about it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nAndrew I care very very much about what Gene Wolfe intended his readers to understand.\nSo much so that I have devoted a lot of hours of study to obscure aspects of mythology\nand the Bible and demonology and gnosticism etc. that I never had an interest in, solely\nto try to understand Gene Wolfe better.\n \nBut, as you elegantly outline through the whole of your post, we can't truly know all his\nintentions. He doesn't want us to know them. He almost surely correctly knows that if we\nknew all his intentions his work would be quite ruined.\n \nI apologize for the condescending tone here, but darn it, there is a manner of learning and \ngrowing and becoming a sophisticated, mature reader of literature. Young readers demand concrete \n\"correct\" answers to mysteries in what they are reading. Adults are supposed to have the wisdom \nto realize that in books, as in life, there isn't always a \"best\" answer for everyone. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-01-07T21:20:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Lee Berman wrote:\nI apologize for the condescending tone here," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you recognize it as something to be apologized for, why do it in\nthe first place?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "but darn it, there is a manner of learning and\ngrowing and becoming a sophisticated, mature reader of literature. Young readers demand concrete\n\"correct\" answers to mysteries in what they are reading. Adults are supposed to have the wisdom\nto realize that in books, as in life, there isn't always a \"best\" answer for everyone." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, but there often is, and the default assumption unless there is\nstrong evidence otherwise is that there is, in fact, an answer which\n\"best\" fits the internal \"facts\" of the text (if not an actual \"right\"\nanswer). \"Adults [should] have the wisdom\" to realize that the best\nanswer won't necessarily be handed to us on a silver platter, nor will\nwe always agree upon which answer is \"best.\"\n\nBut it is perfectly reasonable for an adult to hold that one answer is\nbetter than another, and to do so without denigrating those who hold\nthat other answer." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D27B429.90500@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2011-01-08T00:47:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 1/7/2011 3:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:\nI apologize for the condescending tone here, but darn it, there is a manner of learning and\ngrowing and becoming a sophisticated, mature reader of literature. Young readers demand concrete\n\"correct\" answers to mysteries in what they are reading. Adults are supposed to have the wisdom\nto realize that in books, as in life, there isn't always a \"best\" answer for everyone. \t\t \t \t\t" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would be interested to know if you've read Margaret Atwood's \"Death by \nLandscape\"? It seems to be to be a deliberately answerless and \nunanswerable mystery story, for or by anyone." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<957545.4527.qm@web37605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-01-08T01:14:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": "<4D27B429.90500@io.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would be interested to know if you've read Margaret Atwood's \"Death by \nLandscape\"? It seems to be\nto be a deliberately answerless and unanswerable mystery story, for or by \nanyone." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've taught that story before precisely to teach the value of ambiguity. Works \nwell, actually. And anyone remember \"The Lady and the Tiger\"? I used to teach \nthat to high school freshmen. It drove them absolutely nuts, which was awesome.\n\n\nSo how does one determine the difference between \"Wolfean puzzle\" and \n\"literary/thematic ambiguity\" in Wolfe? That's always the most frustrating thing \nto me about reading him, and about interpreting him (and hearing others talk \nabout him, both here and anywhere): when are you dealing with a legitimate \npuzzle that's meant to be solved by attention to other details in the text? And \nwhen are you dealing with an ambiguity that is supposed to remain ambiguous?\n\nFor example, the talk about imitation leading to truth which has come up lately: \nthat only really works in a \"literary\" way, in my opinion, if it remains \nstructurally ambiguous whether the one/thing doing the imitating actually \nbecomes the thing being imitated. Severian and Christ, say: it is important to \nme that Severian look like a Christian figure and, at times (like with the \nresurrections) even *seem* to become that thing, at least momentarily. However, \nas soon as we move to either definitive statement that Severian *IS* Christ or \nSeverian *IS NOT* an actual messiah, the whole interesting dynamic of \nimitation-leading-to-truth dies. It becomes a plot point rather than something \nmore thematic, potential, or always-a-possibility.\n\nThat's an example where it seems to me that ambiguity (of a certain sort, at \nleast at the plot level) is necessary for the more fundamental meaning to really \nwork. If it just becomes a plot point of Severian either just being a dupe or \nSeverian actually being some kind of true supernatural messiah (above and beyond \nthe Hieros), then it's just a story about a guy who is or isn't a messiah. The \nsubtlety of not revealing that directly is clever but not actually insightful. \nBut if it remains ambiguous, it becomes a story that actually shows a very \nintricate and sophisticated understanding of how an a-religious society could \nbecome \"holy\" in spite of itself. And that's way more interesting, and also much \nmore worthy of how Wolfe actually can say both substantial and misleading things \nabout his \"beliefs\" at the same time.\n\nBUT...if I push on that angle too hard, I might well lose sight of certain \nspecific puzzles in the text, particularly relating to the Hiero backstory, as \nwell as interesting puzzles about Sev's own possible resurrection, etc. In \npractice, then, it seems wrong to stress puzzle-truth or the value of \"multiple \ninterpretations\" and ambiguity too much. That kind of conundrum is peculiar to \nWolfe (and a few other writers), and it can be incredibly fun, but also \nincredibly frustrating, especially if one leans too heavily on a certain \nambiguity for one's interpretation...when someone else may well come up and just \npoint out a fact of the text that \"solves\" the puzzle.\n\n\n " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D2800FC.20608@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2011-01-08T06:15:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in fiction", "in_reply_to": "<957545.4527.qm@web37605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 1/7/2011 7:14 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nI would be interested to know if you've read Margaret Atwood's \"Death by\nLandscape\"? It seems to be\nto be a deliberately answerless and unanswerable mystery story, for or by\nanyone." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I've taught that story before precisely to teach the value of ambiguity. Works\nwell, actually. And anyone remember \"The Lady and the Tiger\"? I used to teach\nthat to high school freshmen. It drove them absolutely nuts, which was awesome." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not really what I meant. There are presented two firm answers, the \nmechanism that determines which one is discussed, and we are left by \nStockton to meditate on the lover's decision; this is a reasonable \nambiguity, all in the mystery of the human heart, and the reader can \nenvision either outcome.\n\nAtwood methodically considers and demolishes all the plausible \nexplanations, sifting out most of the ambiguity of the girls' emotional \nlives and sowing it into the physical world with a seed broadcaster \nwhere it takes root in the vicissitudes of weather, the lake current, \npredators, etc. and lets it ramble for decades unharvested. The reader \nis left with the non-solution of the surviving girl dying of old age \namong her collection still unable to get traction on her friend's \ntraceless disappearance." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2011-01-08T07:37:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in Fiction", "in_reply_to": "<4D2800FC.20608@io.com>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jeff Wilson- I would be interested to know if you've read Margaret Atwood's \"Death by Landscape\"? \nIt seems to be to be a deliberately answerless and unanswerable mystery story, for or by anyone." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nI am not familiar. I can tell you that I am not particularly a fan of absurdist or existential\nliterature. I generally like there to be some answer or conclusion to a story. But I don't think\nI am alone in rejecting the opinion of people who assume they have the authority to tell me the proper\nway to appreciate a piece of artwork. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D286E98.7070908@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2011-01-08T14:03:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in Fiction", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 1/8/2011 2:37 AM, Lee Berman wrote:\nJeff Wilson- I would be interested to know if you've read Margaret Atwood's \"Death by Landscape\"?\nIt seems to be to be a deliberately answerless and unanswerable mystery story, for or by anyone." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am not familiar. I can tell you that I am not particularly a fan of absurdist or existential\nliterature. I generally like there to be some answer or conclusion to a story." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you think about it, this truth might shed some light on your own \nprocess. I am not saying you have come out firmly against ambiguity, but \nyour dissatisfaction with nonconcrete answers is almost palpable \nsometimes. Sometimes allusion is just allusion. We'll never find that \nline that establishes Inire as the king of monkey-men, or the snake in \nthe garden, or the grandfather of the Conciliator.\n\nCraig just wrote a cogent and convincing post on how ambiguity functions \nin BOTNS and how its presence is critical to appreciating the story. \nHe's plainly right. If Severian's status (there's an adjective here I'm \nmissing and can't think of: cosmological? theological?) were as clear as \nit is sometimes summarized, we would not be here discussing it 30 years \nafter publication." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But I don't think\nI am alone in rejecting the opinion of people who assume they have the authority to tell me the proper\nway to appreciate a piece of artwork. \t\t \t \t\t" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Certainly not!" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2011-01-08T14:49:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in Fiction", "in_reply_to": "<4D286E98.7070908@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Craig just wrote a cogent and convincing post on how ambiguity functions \nin BOTNS and how its presence is critical to appreciating the story. \nHe's plainly right. If Severian's status (there's an adjective here I'm \nmissing and can't think of: cosmological? theological?) were as clear as \nit is sometimes summarized, we would not be here discussing it 30 years \nafter publication." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No argument with Craig from me. Could the missing adjective be \"supernatural\"? \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D2883FA.40308@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2011-01-08T15:34:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Truth in Fiction", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 1/8/2011 9:49 AM, Lee Berman wrote:\nCraig just wrote a cogent and convincing post on how ambiguity functions\nin BOTNS and how its presence is critical to appreciating the story.\nHe's plainly right. If Severian's status (there's an adjective here I'm\nmissing and can't think of: cosmological? theological?) were as clear as\nit is sometimes summarized, we would not be here discussing it 30 years\nafter publication." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "No argument with Craig from me. Could the missing adjective be \"supernatural\"? \t\t \t \t\t" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That would cover it---thanks!" } ] } ] }