Buy! Analogy!

Adam Thornton19 Feb 2011, 19:07

So, and I want to preface this by stating that I am NOT on mushrooms, we've often been able to find promising lines of inquiry into Wolfe's work by looking at what books HE likes and then finding their echoes in the things we're studying. Recently we've been (or at least I've been) thinking a lot about Borges in the context of Ultan, the books of BotNS, etc. But this morning it occurred to me that there might be an elephant in the room we're missing. Is there any way to stretch a consistent analogy to BotNS from.... wait for it.... The Wizard of Oz ? We have Severian as Dorothy, obviously, and Triskele as a present-only-in-spirit Toto. Jonas is certainly the Tin Woodsman. Baldanders might be the Cowardly Lion and Talos the Scarecrow (that doesn't seem to work, quite). The Wizard: the Autarch or Inire? I can't decide. Don't forget that "Oz" stands for "Oscar Zoroaster." The Agia/Agilus twins as the WIcked WItches, East and West? Or is Vodalus the W.W.W. ? Hmmm. This is getting less convincing, isn't it? Time to change the subject: The Silver (Ruby if you're playing along on the Technicolor version) Slippers? The ones whose power, it turns out, was inside Dorothy the whole time? Does this sound like any well-known artifact in the books? Yeah, this probably doesn't work. Adam

David Stockhoff19 Feb 2011, 19:57

↳ in reply to Adam Thornton

I don't think it's crazy. You don't need to find 100% correspondence. There is no doubt, for example, but that Jonas is "a" Tin Man or a descendant of him.

21 quoted lines

On 2/19/2011 2:07 PM, Adam Thornton wrote: So, and I want to preface this by stating that I am NOT on mushrooms, we've often been able to find promising lines of inquiry into Wolfe's work by looking at what books HE likes and then finding their echoes in the things we're studying. Recently we've been (or at least I've been) thinking a lot about Borges in the context of Ultan, the books of BotNS, etc. But this morning it occurred to me that there might be an elephant in the room we're missing. Is there any way to stretch a consistent analogy to BotNS from.... wait for it.... The Wizard of Oz ? We have Severian as Dorothy, obviously, and Triskele as a present-only-in-spirit Toto. Jonas is certainly the Tin Woodsman. Baldanders might be the Cowardly Lion and Talos the Scarecrow (that doesn't seem to work, quite). The Wizard: the Autarch or Inire? I can't decide. Don't forget that "Oz" stands for "Oscar Zoroaster." The Agia/Agilus twins as the WIcked WItches, East and West? Or is Vodalus the W.W.W. ? Hmmm. This is getting less convincing, isn't it? Time to change the subject: The Silver (Ruby if you're playing along on the Technicolor version) Slippers? The ones whose power, it turns out, was inside Dorothy the whole time? Does this sound like any well-known artifact in the books? Yeah, this probably doesn't work. Adam _______________________________________________

Andrew Mason19 Feb 2011, 22:24

↳ follows, by subject match David Stockhoff

3 quoted lines

David Stockhoff wrote: I don't think it's crazy. You don't need to find 100% correspondence. There is no doubt, for example, but that Jonas is "a" Tin Man or a descendant of him.

Though it's a reversal of the original story; the Tin Man started off human and became tin, while Jonas started off tin and became partly human.

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes20 Feb 2011, 03:59

↳ in reply to Andrew Mason

3 quoted lines · 1–2 deep

Andrew Mason wrote: I don't think it's crazy. You don't need to find 100% correspondence. There is no doubt, for example, but that Jonas is "a" Tin Man or a descendant of him.

Though it's a reversal of the original story; the Tin Man started off human and became tin, while Jonas started off tin and became partly human.

Also, the Tin Woodman (proper name of the character, if you please) wishes for a heart, while Jonas is deeply, passionately in love, or perhaps lust.

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes

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.