{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6042", "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": 6042, "subject": "Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "messages": 47, "voices": 18, "first": "2011-07-28T14:25:50+00:00", "last": "2011-08-08T21:17:16+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T14:25:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Antonin Scriabin", "address": "kierkegaurdian at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T14:29:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen <\ndanielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:\nJust got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T15:27:26+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:\nGreat!? Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<92390777-0CB3-48D0-81BF-3E36E15B142C@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T15:33:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I thought for sure \"The Left Hand of Darkness\" would make it. \n\nSent from my iPhone" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Jul 28, 2011, at 10:27 AM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:\nSigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list.\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Antonin Scriabin", "address": "kierkegaurdian at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T15:37:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<92390777-0CB3-48D0-81BF-3E36E15B142C@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Honestly I am surprised that Name of the Wind made it ... I guess there are\ngoing to be some strange choices when it is put up to a vote." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Lane Haygood wrote:\nI thought for sure \"The Left Hand of Darkness\" would make it.\n\nSent from my iPhone\n\nOn Jul 28, 2011, at 10:27 AM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list.\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4C8A53C0-2150-4E2C-82AA-4CDA097A30BB@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-07-28T15:55:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I have a love/hate relationship with Rothfuss' work. On the one hand, Kvothe is an interesting character, and I like his setting. On the other hand, Kvothe is less introspective than Severian, and the constant theme of Kvothe's non-romance with Denna is grating. At some point, I just wish he'd say, \"Fine! Be that way!\" to her and go on about his (super-idealized collegiate) life. \n\nSent from my iPhone" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Jul 28, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\nHonestly I am surprised that Name of the Wind made it ... I guess there are going to be some strange choices when it is put up to a vote.\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Lane Haygood wrote:\nI thought for sure \"The Left Hand of Darkness\" would make it.\n\nSent from my iPhone\n\nOn Jul 28, 2011, at 10:27 AM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list.\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E381E34.80307@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T15:56:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<92390777-0CB3-48D0-81BF-3E36E15B142C@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "1) Since this is a democratically selected list, you would probably have \nto limit the voting to exclusively to women to hope that a woman author \nwould make the top 10. We're talking about authors whose work would \ninspire someone in high school or early college--at an age when a writer \nhelps set the concrete of a reader's tastes. Stil, I wouldn't have been \nsurprised to see \"Frankenstein\" on this list. But the most successful \nfemale authors among females in my experience are Rowling, Meyer, and \nLackey. None of which are going to make this list. I haven't read \"The \nTime Traveler's Wife\". Is it as deserving of being on this list as \"The \nName of the Wind\"?\n\n2) The big names are Feminist authors whose work simply feels dated now \n(imagine a Pro-Suffrage SF writer). LeGuin, Atwood, Yarboro...These are \nall skilled writers but their Great Works are essentially museum pieces \nto certain themes that were current in the 1970s. An exception IMO is \nJoanna Russ, whose novels are still worthwhile for study by budding \nwriters -- but I'm not sure I'd call them pleasurable.\n\n3) The woman authors whose work still carries today, do their best work \nin short story format: Tiptree, Willis, and Nancy Kress (yeah! I said it!)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 7/28/2011 10:33 AM, Lane Haygood wrote:\nI thought for sure \"The Left Hand of Darkness\" would make it.\n\nSent from my iPhone\n\nOn Jul 28, 2011, at 10:27 AM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list.\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312313112.14970.YahooMailRC@web114702.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T19:25:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<4E381E34.80307@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: James Wynn " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "1) Since this is a democratically selected list, you would probably have to \nlimit the voting to exclusively to women to hope that a woman author would make \nthe top 10. We're talking about authors whose work would inspire someone in high \nschool or early college--at an age when a writer helps set the concrete of a \nreader's tastes. Stil, I wouldn't have been surprised to see \"Frankenstein\" on \nthis list. But the most successful female authors among females in my experience \nare Rowling, Meyer, and Lackey. None of which are going to make this list. I \nhaven't read \"The Time Traveler's Wife\". Is it as deserving of being on this \nlist as \"The Name of the Wind\"?\n\n2) The big names are Feminist authors whose work simply feels dated now \n(imagine a Pro-Suffrage SF writer). LeGuin, Atwood, Yarboro...These are all \nskilled writers but their Great Works are essentially museum pieces to certain \nthemes that were current in the 1970s. An exception IMO is Joanna Russ, whose \nnovels are still worthwhile for study by budding writers -- but I'm not sure \nI'd call them pleasurable." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This comment strikes me as very strange. Atwood is still quite successful. I \njust finished /The Year of the Flood/ (set at the same time as /Oryx and \nCrake/), which there's nothing particularly feminist about. Even /The \nHandmaid's Tale/ seems no less current now than it would have in the '70s.\n\nAnd Le Guin? What about her Great Works is stuck in the '70s? Unless you \nconsider \"The Word for World is Forest\" to be one of them, which I don't. \nIncidentally, /The Dispossessed/ was the only novel by a woman on the \nscience-fiction shortlist. I can hardly see that kind of anarchism as being to \nthe 1970s what women's suffrage was to the 1910s." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "3) The woman authors whose work still carries today, do their best work in \nshort story format: Tiptree, Willis, and Nancy Kress (yeah! I said it!)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tiptree is the one some of whose stories I might have called museum pieces, such \nas the excellent \"The Women Men Don't See\".\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312314615.38326.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T19:50:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<4E381E34.80307@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, James Wynn wrote:\nFrom: James Wynn \nSubject: Re: (urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 8:56 AM\n1) Since this is a democratically\nselected list, you would probably have to limit the voting\nto exclusively to women to hope that a woman author would\nmake the top 10. We're talking about authors whose work\nwould inspire someone in high school or early college--at an\nage when a writer helps set the concrete of a reader's\ntastes. Stil, I wouldn't have been surprised to see\n\"Frankenstein\" on this list. But the most successful female\nauthors among females in my experience are Rowling, Meyer,\nand Lackey. None of which are going to make this list. I\nhaven't read \"The Time Traveler's Wife\". Is it as deserving\nof being on this list as \"The Name of the Wind\"?\n\n2) The big names are Feminist authors whose work simply\nfeels dated now (imagine a Pro-Suffrage SF writer).\nLeGuin, Atwood, Yarboro...These are all skilled writers but\ntheir Great Works are essentially museum pieces to certain\nthemes that were current in the 1970s. An exception IMO is\nJoanna Russ, whose novels are still worthwhile for study by\nbudding writers -- but I'm not sure I'd call them\npleasurable.\n\n3) The woman authors whose work still carries today, do\ntheir best work in short story format: Tiptree, Willis, and\nNancy Kress (yeah! I said it!)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A whole lot of 70s SF feels dated, from the artistic efforts of Samuel Delany on down, in the same way modernism seems a bit musty lately, or those socially conscious novels of the late 19th and early 20th century that are many things, but are probably not artistic in the final analysis.\n\nI don't know, I always felt like the previously mentioned Atwood was not doing exciting things in the way that more mainstream female writers like Flannery O'Connor or Acker or even Byatt were, I felt like I'd read 1984 and other similar dystopian stuff over and over and over before when I read some of her stuff, or LeGuin's for that matter, so tired of that weak lowest common denominator left slanting. Their SF in general IS too closely tied to a didactic, pragmatic, realistic purpose, instead of the quite possibly teenage boy aimed wow rocket ships explosions impossible science human villains cool plot twist kind of stuff men seem to write in SF ... . \n\nI think there is a better case for quality fantasy female authors than actual SF for some reason (Hobb, Tanith lee, Susanah Clark, some of the gothic (southern or otherwise) stuff, etc). \n\nbut some of the works that were selected seem like they are just recent and in people's memories now, something that is not true of New Sun, which I would like to think deserved to win." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T19:55:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312314615.38326.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't debate that tBotNS deserves to make this cut. I would argue\nthat THE FEMALE MAN equally deserved it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On Tue, 8/2/11, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "From: James Wynn \nSubject: Re: (urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 8:56 AM\n1) Since this is a democratically\nselected list, you would probably have to limit the voting\nto exclusively to women to hope that a woman author would\nmake the top 10. We're talking about authors whose work\nwould inspire someone in high school or early college--at an\nage when a writer helps set the concrete of a reader's\ntastes. Stil, I wouldn't have been surprised to see\n\"Frankenstein\" on this list. But the most successful female\nauthors among females in my experience are Rowling, Meyer,\nand Lackey. None of which are going to make this list. I\nhaven't read \"The Time Traveler's Wife\". Is it as deserving\nof being on this list as \"The Name of the Wind\"?\n\n2) The big names are Feminist authors whose work simply\nfeels dated now (imagine a Pro-Suffrage SF writer).\nLeGuin, Atwood, Yarboro...These are all skilled writers but\ntheir Great Works are essentially museum pieces to certain\nthemes that were current in the 1970s. An exception IMO is\nJoanna Russ, whose novels are still worthwhile for study by\nbudding writers -- but I'm not sure I'd call them\npleasurable.\n\n3) The woman authors whose work still carries today, do\ntheir best work in short story format: Tiptree, Willis, and\nNancy Kress (yeah! I said it!)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "A whole lot of 70s SF feels dated, from the artistic efforts of Samuel Delany on down, in the same way modernism seems a bit musty lately, or those socially conscious novels of the late 19th and early 20th century that are many things, but are probably not artistic in the final analysis.\n\nI don't know, I always felt like the previously mentioned Atwood was not doing exciting things in the way that more mainstream female writers like Flannery O'Connor or Acker or even Byatt were, I felt like I'd read 1984 and other similar dystopian stuff over and over and over before when I read some of her stuff, or LeGuin's for that matter, so tired of that weak lowest common denominator left slanting. ?Their SF in general IS too closely tied to a didactic, pragmatic, realistic purpose, instead of the quite possibly teenage boy aimed wow rocket ships explosions impossible science human villains cool plot twist kind of stuff men seem to write in SF ... .\n\nI think there is a better case for quality fantasy female authors than actual SF for some reason (Hobb, Tanith lee, Susanah Clark, some of the gothic (southern or otherwise) stuff, etc).\n\nbut some of the works that were selected seem like they are just recent and in people's memories now, something that is not true of New Sun, which I would like to think deserved to win.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312326094.60046.YahooMailRC@web114702.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T23:01:34+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312314615.38326.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Marc Aramini " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[women SF writers of the 70s feeling dated]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "A whole lot of 70s SF feels dated, from the artistic efforts of Samuel Delany \non down, in the same way modernism seems a bit musty lately, or those socially \nconscious novels of the late 19th and early 20th century that are many things, \nbut are probably not artistic in the final analysis.\n\nI don't know, I always felt like the previously mentioned Atwood was not doing \nexciting things in the way that more mainstream female writers like Flannery \nO'Connor or Acker or even Byatt were, I felt like I'd read 1984 and other \nsimilar dystopian stuff over and over and over before when I read some of her \nstuff, or LeGuin's for that matter, so tired of that weak lowest common \ndenominator left slanting. Their SF in general IS too closely tied to a \ndidactic, pragmatic, realistic purpose, instead of the quite possibly teenage \nboy aimed wow rocket ships explosions impossible science human villains cool \nplot twist kind of stuff men seem to write in SF ... . " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the 70s--Heinlein, Asimov, \nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl, Kornbluth--were extremely \ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke might be an exception. \nAnd I don't think women writers had or have any kind of monopoly on weak \nlowest-common-denominator left, right, or libertarian slanting (though this does \nbring up Ayn Rand...), certainly not considering the shoot-em-ups that you \nrightly note are aimed at teenage boys." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think there is a better case for quality fantasy female authors than actual \nSF for some reason (Hobb, Tanith lee, Susanah Clark, some of the gothic \n(southern or otherwise) stuff, etc). " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nAnd, of course, Le Guin, author of the best YA fantasy ever (and I say this \nwithout having read Harry Potter).\n\nLee's Flat Earth books are one of my guilty pleasures." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "but some of the works that were selected seem like they are just recent and in \npeople's memories now, something that is not true of New Sun, which I would \nlike to think deserved to win." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll go along with that, unsurprisingly.\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-02T23:33:03+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312326094.60046.YahooMailRC@web114702.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've read Harry Potter. Entertaining pop stuff. Well-crafted, but LeGuin's work is transcendent. Even her Earthsea novels (which are pale shadows of her SF) are better than Rowling on her best day. \n\nSent from my iPhone" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Aug 2, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote:\nFrom: Marc Aramini " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[women SF writers of the 70s feeling dated]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "A whole lot of 70s SF feels dated, from the artistic efforts of Samuel Delany \non down, in the same way modernism seems a bit musty lately, or those socially \nconscious novels of the late 19th and early 20th century that are many things, \nbut are probably not artistic in the final analysis.\n\nI don't know, I always felt like the previously mentioned Atwood was not doing \nexciting things in the way that more mainstream female writers like Flannery \nO'Connor or Acker or even Byatt were, I felt like I'd read 1984 and other \nsimilar dystopian stuff over and over and over before when I read some of her \nstuff, or LeGuin's for that matter, so tired of that weak lowest common \ndenominator left slanting. Their SF in general IS too closely tied to a \ndidactic, pragmatic, realistic purpose, instead of the quite possibly teenage \nboy aimed wow rocket ships explosions impossible science human villains cool \nplot twist kind of stuff men seem to write in SF ... . " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the 70s--Heinlein, Asimov, \nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl, Kornbluth--were extremely \ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke might be an exception. \nAnd I don't think women writers had or have any kind of monopoly on weak \nlowest-common-denominator left, right, or libertarian slanting (though this does \nbring up Ayn Rand...), certainly not considering the shoot-em-ups that you \nrightly note are aimed at teenage boys." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think there is a better case for quality fantasy female authors than actual \nSF for some reason (Hobb, Tanith lee, Susanah Clark, some of the gothic \n(southern or otherwise) stuff, etc). " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And, of course, Le Guin, author of the best YA fantasy ever (and I say this \nwithout having read Harry Potter).\n\nLee's Flat Earth books are one of my guilty pleasures." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "but some of the works that were selected seem like they are just recent and in \npeople's memories now, something that is not true of New Sun, which I would \nlike to think deserved to win." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll go along with that, unsurprisingly.\n\nJerry Friedman\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312336245.34374.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T01:50:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312326094.60046.YahooMailRC@web114702.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:\nFrom: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov, \nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely \ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except Bradbury, his summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature sinister loss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . . tedious to me for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those guys were really artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens author, and he had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring Dostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312336610.56023.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T01:56:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312336245.34374.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I meant the gathering OF its subtle but sinister loss below, and, of course, Avram Davidson. Sorry." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Marc Aramini wrote:\nFrom: Marc Aramini \nSubject: Re: (urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Tuesday, August 2, 2011, 6:50 PM\nIt's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there\nexcept Bradbury, his summoning of innocence and the\ngathering its subtle but mature sinister loss always\ninterested me. never liked most of those guys? .\n. . tedious to me for some reason. " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T14:16:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312336245.34374.YahooMailClassic@web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Marc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com to Urth:My favorites were probably more\nlikely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A\nLafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon\nthough.\n\n\nNice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian Aldiss,\nMichael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually my kind\nof brew. I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of\nanthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I\nreally haven't read much s.f. beyond that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans\n70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only\nwent backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur\nMachen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. I'm really interested in\ndelving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick,\nWiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C.\nWright, etc. Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write\nabout the entire oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe!\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except Bradbury,\nhis summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature sinister\nloss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . . tedious to\nme for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those guys were\nreally artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens author, and\nhe had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists,\nZelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith,\netc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring\nDostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Antonin Scriabin", "address": "kierkegaurdian at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T14:23:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "R. A. Lafferty is very good, but unfortunately I have only been able to find\nand read one of his novels (his first, *Past Master*). I definitely will\nkeep my eye out for more. I had no idea \"science fantasists\" was a\nsub-genre, and one I enjoyed so much!\n\n-K" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Daniel Petersen <\ndanielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:\nMarc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com to Urth:My favorites were probably more\nlikely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A\nLafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon\nthough.\n\n\nNice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian\nAldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually\nmy kind of brew. I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of\nanthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I\nreally haven't read much s.f. beyond that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans\n70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only\nwent backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur\nMachen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. I'm really interested in\ndelving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick,\nWiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C.\nWright, etc. Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write\nabout the entire oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe!\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except Bradbury,\nhis summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature sinister\nloss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . . tedious to\nme for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those guys were\nreally artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens author, and\nhe had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science\nfantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson,\nCordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring\nDostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T14:32:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Since the topic has turned slightly to Lafferty, I'd be remiss in not\nmentioning I write the only blog on the net dedicated to him:\n\nhttp://antsofgodarequeerfish.blogspot.com/\n\n(It's been mentioned here before, but just in case present company didn't\nknow that...)\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonin Scriabin\nwrote:\nR. A. Lafferty is very good, but unfortunately I have only been able to\nfind and read one of his novels (his first, *Past Master*). I definitely\nwill keep my eye out for more. I had no idea \"science fantasists\" was a\nsub-genre, and one I enjoyed so much!\n\n-K\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Daniel Petersen <\ndanielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com to Urth:My favorites were probably\nmore likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A\nLafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon\nthough.\n\n\nNice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian\nAldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually\nmy kind of brew. I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of\nanthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I\nreally haven't read much s.f. beyond that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans\n70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only\nwent backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur\nMachen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. I'm really interested in\ndelving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick,\nWiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C.\nWright, etc. Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write\nabout the entire oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe!\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except\nBradbury, his summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature\nsinister loss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . .\ntedious to me for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those\nguys were really artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens\nauthor, and he had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science\nfantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson,\nCordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring\nDostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Antonin Scriabin", "address": "kierkegaurdian at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T14:38:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks for the link! I look forward to exploring more about and by\nLafferty.\n\nOn the topic of women writers, has anyone read anything by Janny Wurts? I\nhear good things about her large and ongoing *Wars of Light and Shadow* and\nhave picked up the first two books, but have enough on my to-read pile that\nI can't start them. A brief scan through shows that the prose is very\ndense, flowery, and \"archaic\" ... which is something I am more likely to\nenjoy than not, if done well. My favorite female writers have all tended to\nbe pretty far from the science fiction / fantasy genres (Jeannette Winterson\nand Joyce Carol Oates)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Daniel Petersen <\ndanielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:\nSince the topic has turned slightly to Lafferty, I'd be remiss in not\nmentioning I write the only blog on the net dedicated to him:\n\nhttp://antsofgodarequeerfish.blogspot.com/\n\n(It's been mentioned here before, but just in case present company didn't\nknow that...)\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Marc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com to Urth:My favorites were probably\nmore likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A\nLafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon\nthough.\n\n\nNice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian\nAldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually\nmy kind of brew. I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of\nanthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I\nreally haven't read much s.f. beyond that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans\n70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only\nwent backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur\nMachen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. I'm really interested in\ndelving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick,\nWiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C.\nWright, etc. Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write\nabout the entire oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe!\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except\nBradbury, his summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature\nsinister loss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . .\ntedious to me for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those\nguys were really artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens\nauthor, and he had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science\nfantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson,\nCordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring\nDostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1C130BC0-83F5-4384-99A1-BE2BB8E7E64A@liftingfaces.com>", "from": { "name": "Ryan Dunn", "address": "ryan at liftingfaces.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T15:39:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nancy Kress is another very gifted female SF writer, I'm not sure if she was mentioned yet or not.\n\n?ryan" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:38 AM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\nThanks for the link! I look forward to exploring more about and by Lafferty.\n\nOn the topic of women writers, has anyone read anything by Janny Wurts? I hear good things about her large and ongoing Wars of Light and Shadow and have picked up the first two books, but have enough on my to-read pile that I can't start them. A brief scan through shows that the prose is very dense, flowery, and \"archaic\" ... which is something I am more likely to enjoy than not, if done well. My favorite female writers have all tended to be pretty far from the science fiction / fantasy genres (Jeannette Winterson and Joyce Carol Oates).\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\nSince the topic has turned slightly to Lafferty, I'd be remiss in not mentioning I write the only blog on the net dedicated to him:\n\nhttp://antsofgodarequeerfish.blogspot.com/\n\n(It's been mentioned here before, but just in case present company didn't know that...)\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\nR. A. Lafferty is very good, but unfortunately I have only been able to find and read one of his novels (his first, Past Master). I definitely will keep my eye out for more. I had no idea \"science fantasists\" was a sub-genre, and one I enjoyed so much!\n\n-K\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\nMarc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com to Urth:My favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\n\nNice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian Aldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually my kind of brew. I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of anthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I really haven't read much s.f. beyond that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans 70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only went backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur Machen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. I'm really interested in delving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick, Wiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C. Wright, etc. Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write about the entire oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe! \n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except Bradbury, his summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature sinister loss always interested me. never liked most of those guys . . . tedious to me for some reason. I liked some of Clarke. I don't think those guys were really artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a childrens author, and he had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, I suppose, like preferring Dostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E396F5F.7000601@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T15:55:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1C130BC0-83F5-4384-99A1-BE2BB8E7E64A@liftingfaces.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I did! I did! I think she's under rated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/3/2011 10:39 AM, Ryan Dunn wrote:\nNancy Kress is another very gifted female SF writer, I'm not sure if \nshe was mentioned yet or not.\n\n...ryan\n\n\n\nOn Aug 3, 2011, at 10:38 AM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Thanks for the link! I look forward to exploring more about and by \nLafferty.\n\nOn the topic of women writers, has anyone read anything by Janny \nWurts? I hear good things about her large and ongoing /Wars of Light \nand Shadow/ and have picked up the first two books, but have enough \non my to-read pile that I can't start them. A brief scan through \nshows that the prose is very dense, flowery, and \"archaic\" ... which \nis something I am more likely to enjoy than not, if done well. My \nfavorite female writers have all tended to be pretty far from the \nscience fiction / fantasy genres (Jeannette Winterson and Joyce Carol \nOates).\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Daniel Petersen \n> wrote:\n\n Since the topic has turned slightly to Lafferty, I'd be remiss in\n not mentioning I write the only blog on the net dedicated to him:\n\n http://antsofgodarequeerfish.blogspot.com/\n\n (It's been mentioned here before, but just in case present\n company didn't know that...)\n\n -DOJP\n\n\n On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonin Scriabin\n > wrote:\n\n R. A. Lafferty is very good, but unfortunately I have only\n been able to find and read one of his novels (his first,\n /Past Master/). I definitely will keep my eye out for more. \n I had no idea \"science fantasists\" was a sub-genre, and one I\n enjoyed so much!\n\n -K\n\n\n On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Daniel Petersen\n > wrote:\n\n Marc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com\n to Urth:My favorites were\n probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists,\n Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson,\n Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\n\n Nice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan\n Ellison, Brian Aldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of\n course, Wolfe, and that's usually my kind of brew. I\n still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of\n anthropological s.f. period. From the 80s I've enjoyed\n Dan Simmons, but I really haven't read much s.f. beyond\n that. (Except Tim Powers, who spans 70s to now, and whom\n I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). I only went\n backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope\n Hodgson, Arthur Machen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard,\n etc. I'm really interested in delving into more\n contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick,\n Wiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De\n Lint, John C. Wright, etc. Still trying to fit it in\n whilst trying to read and write about the entire oeuvres\n of Lafferty and Wolfe!\n\n -DOJP\n\n On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini\n > wrote:\n\n\n\n --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman\n > wrote:\n\n > From: Jerry Friedman >\n >>\n > I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors\n before the\n > 70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\n > Van Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\n > Kornbluth--were extremely\n > didactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\n > might be an exception.\n\n It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors\n there except Bradbury, his summoning of innocence and\n the gathering its subtle but mature sinister loss\n always interested me. never liked most of those guys\n . . . tedious to me for some reason. I liked some\n of Clarke. I don't think those guys were really\n artists (call me a snob). Asimov I liked as a\n childrens author, and he had one or two works that\n surpassed his usual output.\n\n My favorites were probably more likely to be labeled\n as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A\n Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I\n liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\n Just personal opinion to some degree, I suppose,\n like preferring Dostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to\n Richardson.\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312387160.64823.YahooMailNeo@web121001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T15:59:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1C130BC0-83F5-4384-99A1-BE2BB8E7E64A@liftingfaces.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've become a fast fan of Catherine M. Valente. Her style is way too ornate for a lot of people (the usual assessment some of my friends have is that she's \"trying too hard\"), but I actually think she has an amazingly productive imagination. Not sure I'd call it Wolfean at all, but I haven't been disappointed. She does have lots of fun re-imagining old myths, though.\n\nAnd I agree about Kress. Great stuff. Then there's Octavia Butler, Nalo Hopkinson (who is unfairly undersold, methinks), Kelly Link (one of THE best short story writers in the last decade or so), Susanna Clarke deserves a mention (again, people put her down sometimes because her big book seems to start off like a riff on Harry Potter...which it isn't). And what about old(er) school stuff? Andre Norton, Connie Willis, Susan Cooper, Diana Wynn Jones (don't let the \"young adult\" label fool you), Cherryh, Tanith Lee. So much good stuff.\n\nSorry. I don't think this started as a \"please recommend your favorite female writers\" thread, but I just turned it into that. My bad. :)\n\n\n\n\n\nNancy Kress is another very gifted female SF writer, I'm not sure if she was mentioned yet or not.\n\n?ryan\n\n\n\n\nOn Aug 3, 2011, at 10:38 AM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\n\nThanks for the link!? I look forward to exploring more about and by Lafferty." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On the topic of women writers, has anyone read anything by Janny Wurts? I hear good things about her large and ongoing Wars of Light and Shadow and have picked up the first two books, but have enough on my to-read pile that I can't start them. A brief scan through shows that the prose is very dense, flowery, and \"archaic\" ... which is something I am more likely to enjoy than not, if done well. My favorite female writers have all tended to be pretty far from the science fiction / fantasy genres (Jeannette Winterson and Joyce Carol Oates).\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\nSince the topic has turned slightly to Lafferty, I'd be remiss in not mentioning I write the only blog on the net dedicated to him:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "http://antsofgodarequeerfish.blogspot.com/\n\n\n(It's been mentioned here before, but just in case present company didn't know that...)\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\n\nR. A. Lafferty is very good, but unfortunately I have only been able to find and read one of his novels (his first, Past Master). I definitely will keep my eye out for more. I had no idea \"science fantasists\" was a sub-genre, and one I enjoyed so much!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "-K\n\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\nMarc Aramini marcaramini at yahoo.com?to?Urth:My favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Nice list (including Bradbury) - throw in some Harlan Ellison, Brian Aldiss, Michael Bishop, Le Guin, and, of course, Wolfe, and that's usually my kind of brew. ?I still can't get past that 60s/70s 'New Wave' sort of anthropological s.f. period. ?From the 80s I've enjoyed Dan Simmons, but I really haven't read much s.f. beyond that. ?(Except Tim Powers, who spans 70s to now, and whom I'm increasingly becoming a genuine fan of). ?I only went backwards in time from there - Lovecraft, William Hope Hodgson, Arthur Machen, Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, etc. ?I'm really interested in delving into more contemporary stuff from the likes of Michael Swanwick, Wiliam Gibson, China Mieville, Charles Stross, Charles De Lint, John C. Wright, etc. ?Still trying to fit it in whilst trying to read and write about the entire?oeuvres of Lafferty and Wolfe!?\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "--- On Tue, 8/2/11, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "From: Jerry Friedman " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 6, "text": "I'd say a lot of the most admired male authors before the\n70s--Heinlein, Asimov,\nVan Vogt (who I don't like), Anderson, Bradbury, Pohl,\nKornbluth--were extremely\ndidactic, with pragmatic, realistic purposes. Clarke\nmight be an exception." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 5, "text": "It's funny, you named all my least favorite authors there except Bradbury, his summoning of innocence and the gathering its subtle but mature sinister loss always interested me. ?never liked most of those guys ?. . . tedious to me for some reason. ?I liked some of Clarke. ?I don't think those guys were really artists (call me a snob). ?Asimov I liked as a childrens author, and he had one or two works that surpassed his usual output.\n\nMy favorites were probably more likely to be labeled as science fantasists, Zelazny, Philip K Dick, R A Lafferty, Abraham Davidson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. I liked Theodore Sturgeon though.\n\nJust personal opinion to some degree, ?I suppose, like preferring Dostoyevsky to Tolstoy or Sterne to Richardson.\n\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E397395.6010803@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T16:13:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<1312387160.64823.YahooMailNeo@web121001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote (03-08-2011 16:59):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sorry. I don't think this started as a \"please recommend your favorite\nfemale writers\" thread, but I just turned it into that. My bad. :)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Geraldine Harris!\n\nAngela Carter." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Knight", "address": "jacobeiserman at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T17:29:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "<4E397395.6010803@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hope Mirrlees (though I've only read the one novel by her)\n\n\n\n2011/8/3 Ant?nio Pedro Marques " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote (03-08-2011 16:59):\n\n Sorry. I don't think this started as a \"please recommend your favorite\nfemale writers\" thread, but I just turned it into that. My bad. :)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Geraldine Harris!\n\nAngela Carter.\n\n______________________________**_________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-03T17:36:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Somehow I seem to have only read a handful of women writers over the years:\n Flannery O'Connor is one of my favourite authors, period. Ursula Le Guin\nimpresses me hugely at times. I'm interested in checking out more Kathe\nKoja. But I just don't dig dividing it up between men and women anyway -\nit's more about great authors to me, regardless of gender.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Matthew Knight wrote:\nHope Mirrlees (though I've only read the one novel by her)\n\n\n\n2011/8/3 Ant?nio Pedro Marques " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Craig Brewer wrote (03-08-2011 16:59):\n\n Sorry. I don't think this started as a \"please recommend your favorite\nfemale writers\" thread, but I just turned it into that. My bad. :)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Geraldine Harris!\n\nAngela Carter.\n\n______________________________**_________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<8C77279DC20444D8BE574BDDF0BA9348@jill>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2011-08-04T14:17:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Gwyneth Jones's Aleutian Trilogy (White Queen, North Wind, Phoenix Cafe) is excellent.\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n\n ----- Original Message ----- \n From: Daniel Petersen \n To: The Urth Mailing List \n Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:36 PM\n Subject: Re: (urth) Female sf/f ...WAS: Book of the New Sun won the contest!\n\n\n Somehow I seem to have only read a handful of women writers over the years: Flannery O'Connor is one of my favourite authors, period. Ursula Le Guin impresses me hugely at times. I'm interested in checking out more Kathe Koja. But I just don't dig dividing it up between men and women anyway - it's more about great authors to me, regardless of gender." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3DDF73.8070604@sky.com>", "from": { "name": "Jane Delawney", "address": "jane_delawney at sky.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T00:42:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won the contest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 28/07/11 16:27, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nSigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l, sorry to change the header and divert the thread but as I've \noften noted before I will not receive my list mails back unless I do \nthis. That's Sky Mail aka gmail for you :(\n\nOn your comment: well as a woman I care far less about the lack of \nfemale presence in the top 10 than I do about the *absence* of Ringworld \nand also The Disposessed.\n\nPraise the Lord, or the higher power of your choice, that neither of \nthese made it!\n\nNiven is one of the most sexist male SF writers ever IMO (so even if \nRingworld itself isn't sexist (I don't know, because I'll never read a \nNiven ever again after looking briefly at the Man-Kzin Wars / Known \nSpace series); Le Guin is ... well I don't know what to say. I did not \nmanage to read more than 1 chapter of The Disposessed; she was so intent \non banging her drum and drilling into our heads the contrast between her \nidyllic but backward egalitarians and the technologically advanced \nsexist b*****ds. Hated the sheer manipulative lameness. Hated every \nsentence of it.\n\nOnly Le Guin adult fic I ever managed to finish was The Lathe of Heaven. \nOn the other hand I loved the original Earthsea series, though not the \nfollow-up recantations (should have said 'quod scripsi scripsi, deal \nwith it, IMO).\n\nOTOH I will almost certainly buy the new Gollancz BOTNS eds when they \nappear, how great to see Gene voted most wanted reprint. Fabulous!!\n\nJD" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Greg Bates", "address": "gregory.a.bates at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T01:54:57+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won the\n\tcontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<4E3DDF73.8070604@sky.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Have you not read The Left Hand of Darkness? I completely agree with you on\nThe Dispossessed but I definitely think LHoD is worth your time." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Jane Delawney wrote:\nOn 28/07/11 16:27, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l, sorry to change the header and divert the thread but as I've often\nnoted before I will not receive my list mails back unless I do this. That's\nSky Mail aka gmail for you :(\n\nOn your comment: well as a woman I care far less about the lack of female\npresence in the top 10 than I do about the *absence* of Ringworld and also\nThe Disposessed.\n\nPraise the Lord, or the higher power of your choice, that neither of these\nmade it!\n\nNiven is one of the most sexist male SF writers ever IMO (so even if\nRingworld itself isn't sexist (I don't know, because I'll never read a Niven\never again after looking briefly at the Man-Kzin Wars / Known Space series);\nLe Guin is ... well I don't know what to say. I did not manage to read more\nthan 1 chapter of The Disposessed; she was so intent on banging her drum and\ndrilling into our heads the contrast between her idyllic but backward\negalitarians and the technologically advanced sexist b*****ds. Hated the\nsheer manipulative lameness. Hated every sentence of it.\n\nOnly Le Guin adult fic I ever managed to finish was The Lathe of Heaven. On\nthe other hand I loved the original Earthsea series, though not the\nfollow-up recantations (should have said 'quod scripsi scripsi, deal with\nit, IMO).\n\nOTOH I will almost certainly buy the new Gollancz BOTNS eds when they\nappear, how great to see Gene voted most wanted reprint. Fabulous!!\n\nJD\n\n\n\n\n\n\n On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Antonin Scriabin\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Great! Glad TBONS is getting a new edition ... another one for the\ncollection :-)\n\nOn Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Daniel Petersen\n>\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Just got this in my inbox today... expect a snazzy new edition from\nGollancz!\n\nhttp://www.gollancz50.com/\n\n\n-DOJP\n\n______________________________**_________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "davidd at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2011-08-07T03:23:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won\n\tthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Greg Bates wrote:\nHave you not read The Left Hand of Darkness? I completely agree with you on\nThe Dispossessed but I definitely think LHoD is worth your time.\n\nOn Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Jane Delawney wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Le Guin is ... well I don't know what to say. I did not manage to read more\nthan 1 chapter of The Disposessed; she was so intent on banging her drum and\ndrilling into our heads the contrast between her idyllic but backward\negalitarians and the technologically advanced sexist b*****ds. Hated the\nsheer manipulative lameness. Hated every sentence of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This reaction always interests me (esp. since if you didn't read more than \none chapter, I can't see how you can know much about the Urrasti :)). It \nalso ties into the ongoing \"villains\" thread, in that the society of the \n\"technologically advanced sexist b*****ds\" is villainous, but many \nindividuals from it don't come across as personally vindictive, cf Sabul, \nthe Annarasti physicist who likes being top dog. I mean if our hero was \nvisiting Saudi Arabia, I presume you wouldn't have thought it was \nmaniipulative lameness to comment on the absence of women driving cars...\n\nAnyway, I am circling back to Wolfe's politics, which although slightly to \nthe right of, maybe, Charlemagne, never seem obtrusive to me as a more \nleft leaning reader. _And_ gun control, as alluded to in _Home Fires_ and \na few others, which never has seemed so much of an issue down here in \nAustralia. Wolfe frequently has obnoxious totalitarian US governments (eg \n_the Eyeflash Miracles_), which I presume no-one here found offensively \npreachy.\n\nJust 2c... David Duffy." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T03:54:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won\n\tthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I have found a few Wolfe works \"preachy,\" but it doesn't bother me any\nmore than Mieville's preachiness, even though I agree more with\nMieville than Wolfe. I suppose because Wolfe and Mieville are\nintelligent I can recognize in them a like mind that can discuss\ndifferences rationally.\n\nI don't actually have a problem with righties, I have a problem with\nuncritical acceptance of any position and people that have an aversion\nto anything that challenges their own viewpoints. So, for instance, I\nhave no problem reading Wolfe or even C.S. Lewis, but I find reading\nsomeone like Ayn Rand tiring, and I had to put down Dan Simmons'\n(always a favorite of mine) latest because I just got tired of the\nconstant \"Muslims are gonna kill us all!\" hysteria.\n\nThat said, I think LeGuin can be heavy-handed at times (like the\nDispossessed) but her brand of left-anarchism is more or less\npalatable to both lefties and libertarian-types, in the same way that\nOrwell (a democratic socialist) and Huxley (general malcontent) are\ngenerally palatable for their anti-authoritarian views which more or\nless fit nicely with any pro-democratic political bent, whatever that\nbent's views on economics and social stratification.\n\nLH" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312699296.27481.YahooMailClassic@web161813.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T06:41:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won\n\tthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Sat, 8/6/11, Lane Haygood wrote:\nFrom: Lane Haygood " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I have found a few Wolfe works\n\"preachy,\" but it doesn't bother me any\nmore than Mieville's preachiness, even though I agree more\nwith\nMieville than Wolfe. I suppose because Wolfe and\nMieville are\nintelligent I can recognize in them a like mind that can\ndiscuss\ndifferences rationally.\n\nI don't actually have a problem with righties, I have a\nproblem with\nuncritical acceptance of any position and people that have\nan aversion\nto anything that challenges their own viewpoints. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I wonder how many readers of Wolfe are intrinsically slanted to the left.\n\nThis is way off topic so the rest of this post can be ignored by any except the curious, I am intrigued by the \"type\" of reader drawn to Gene.\n\nOutside my \"politics\" I'm a very nice guy and a good friend, my politics are almost abstractions that have no real impact on my life, but inside and kept to myself I tend to identify with a very extreme kind of \"right\".\n\nIts curious to me, sometimes I feel like I'm ALMOST his target audience: a mostly conservative Catholic who buys into benevolent,just, and intelligently used might making right. Then again, I've NEVER talked to anyone with my particular set of beliefs in real life.\n\nI'm philosophically but not practically so far right its not even on a spectrum anymore: I think voting is flawed, just because most people think something is right or true doesn't make it just, a truly unpopular opinion cannot ever reign, I don't really believe in equality (some people have nothing but pain and suffering to contribute to society, others contribute great things and are inexplicably gifted with more than can benefit humanity). At best democracy is happy illusion, at worst a lie of false empowerment. \n\nI am tied to morality only by my faith in absolute right and wrong (I do happen to believe all life is sacred): arbitrary and nonsensical laws have no real moral authority, where location makes a crime (prostitution legal in Nevada but not Arizona, elimination of an inconvenient fetus/youngling illegal once it has left the womb but not before, stem cell and genetic engineering illegal when performed on things not legally recognzed as human beings, the killing of a mother deemeed a double murder, etc. woefully inconsistent) \n\nWhen I worked for my wife's family circus I saw the evils of socialism: from each according to his abilities (mostly mine), to each according to his needs (mostly not mine) and when times are tough, nothing. I have sympathy for the weak and the injured, the lame and the suffering, those who were not given the gifts of this world, but developed and automatic qualities will always create vast and intrinsic inequalities which the mere accident of being born human can never erase. \n\nIt is my duty to help those with less ability achieve what they can within reason, but every system that admits to experience and mastery recognizes there is no such thing as equality.\n\nI am still willing to accept the societal need for morally gray institutions like abortion, but I will of course then take the necessary extreme slippery slope view that all life is intrinsically NOT sacred and that all undesirable elements should be similarly removed from a position where they can cause inconvenience, (because that's the way my mind works.)\n\nIs there anybody who thinks like this, or am I the only one?" } ] }, { "message_id": "<013101cc54cf$4c0aee50$4001a8c0@pc>", "from": { "name": "pinlighter", "address": "pinlighter at btconnect.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T06:57:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun\n\twonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<1312699296.27481.YahooMailClassic@web161813.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Damn leftie!!\n - hartshorn\n\n\n----- Original Message ----- \nFrom: \"Marc Aramini\" \n\nIs there anybody who thinks like this, or am I the only one?" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6ADB7FB6738345719BBF369BF609F0A7@jill>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T08:36:28+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun\n\twonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<1312699296.27481.YahooMailClassic@web161813.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Marc Aramini\" \nI am still willing to accept the societal need for morally gray \ninstitutions like abortion,\nbut I will of course then take the necessary extreme slippery slope view \nthat all life is\nintrinsically NOT sacred and that all undesirable elements should be \nsimilarly removed\nfrom a position where they can cause inconvenience, (because that's the \nway my mind works.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "IMO that's not a philosophy that tells you very much, because you have not \nyet defined inconvenience, and if your definition is restrictive you might \nend up with a fairly typical society.\n\nWithout specifics, you are really only asserting that the complete absence \nof moral relativism is intolerable, but too much of it might also be a bad \nthing...\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "davidd at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2011-08-07T08:37:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun\n\twonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<1312699296.27481.YahooMailClassic@web161813.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Marc Aramini wrote:\nWhen I worked for my wife's family circus I saw the evils of socialism: \nfrom each according to his abilities (mostly mine), to each according to \nhis needs (mostly not mine) and when times are tough, nothing." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You knew someone would not resist :)\n\nAnd all that believed were together, and had all things common. And sold \ntheir possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had \nneed.\n\nCheers, David Duffy." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "davidd at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2011-08-07T08:51:08+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun\n\twonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Lane Haygood wrote:\nI have found a few Wolfe works \"preachy,\" but it doesn't bother me any\nmore than Mieville's preachiness, even though I agree more with\nMieville than Wolfe. I suppose because Wolfe and Mieville are\nintelligent I can recognize in them a like mind that can discuss\ndifferences rationally." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this is exactly right." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "So, for instance, I have no problem reading Wolfe or even C.S. Lewis, \nbut I find reading someone like Ayn Rand tiring," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I found _His Hideous Strength_ unreadable for that reason, but not the \nfirst two of the Space Trilogy. But everything by Charles Williams is \ndelicious. Actually, this makes we wonder if there are any Wolfean \nallusions to Williams? I have never read _A computer iterates the greater \ntrumps_ -- is there anything there?\n\nCheers, David Duffy." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "entonio at gmail.com", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T13:04:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won\n\tthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<1312699296.27481.YahooMailClassic@web161813.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No dia 2011/08/07, ?s 07:41, Marc Aramini \nescreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Is there anybody who thinks like this, or am I the only one?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes :D\nI'm more impressed by what people do than by what they profess. That \nalso applies to literature; generally speaking, preaching or derision, \nif they have nothing else going for them, make for a poor product. " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3E9279.2030706@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T13:26:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list", "in_reply_to": "<4E3DDF73.8070604@sky.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/6/2011 7:42 PM, Jane Delawney wrote:\nOn 28/07/11 16:27, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l, sorry to change the header and divert the thread but as I've\noften noted before I will not receive my list mails back unless I do\nthis. That's Sky Mail aka gmail for you :(\n\nOn your comment: well as a woman I care far less about the lack of\nfemale presence in the top 10 than I do about the *absence* of Ringworld\nand also The Disposessed." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "RINGWORLD never really struck me as that great a book, but how is it \nespecially sexist for its time?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at clueland.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3E939C.4080704@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T13:31:08+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list", "in_reply_to": "<4E3DDF73.8070604@sky.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/6/2011 7:42 PM, Jane Delawney wrote:\nOn 28/07/11 16:27, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l, sorry to change the header and divert the thread but as I've\noften noted before I will not receive my list mails back unless I do\nthis. That's Sky Mail aka gmail for you :(\n\nOn your comment: well as a woman I care far less about the lack of\nfemale presence in the top 10 than I do about the *absence* of Ringworld\nand also The Disposessed.\n\nPraise the Lord, or the higher power of your choice, that neither of\nthese made it!\n\nNiven is one of the most sexist male SF writers ever IMO (so even if\nRingworld itself isn't sexist (I don't know, because I'll never read a\nNiven ever again after looking briefly at the Man-Kzin Wars / Known\nSpace series)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Er, how is _Niven_ especially sexist? There was a story where a woman \ngets terribly experimented on and forcibly bred by a Kzin, but that was \nby Donald Kingsbury, not Niven." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at clueland.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3E93A8.1010602@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T13:31:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won\n\tthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think it is worth mentioning again that Wolfe's politics do not really \nmap to a political party. It's vaguely conservative and vaguely \nlibertarian. Essentially a kind of conservativism that is common here in \nTexas--but more radical.\n\nI heard him say a few years ago that \"The form of government I favor is \nDemocracy. America is not a Democracy. It is a Republic. That means that \never few years we choose people to be in charge. And when we have--you \ncan believe--they know it.\" At other times, during the late \nClinton/early Bush presidencies he stated that the US government was \ncurrently dominated by a class of elites.\n\nAs I read his attitude toward government, it is that it is always \nessentially an evil, a curse, --always a tool of some in-crowd to \nimprove their own lot at the expense of others--with intermittent \nperiods of benevolence.\n\nJ." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312726603.74631.YahooMailNeo@web114706.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T14:16:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won the\n\tcontest!)", "in_reply_to": "<4E3DDF73.8070604@sky.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Jane Delawney " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 28/07/11 16:27, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " Sigh. Not a single book by a woman made the list." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On your comment: well as a woman I care far less about the lack of female \npresence in the top 10 than I do about the *absence* of Ringworld and also The \nDisposessed.\n\nPraise the Lord, or the higher power of your choice, that neither of these made \nit!\n\nNiven is one of the most sexist male SF writers ever IMO (so even if Ringworld \nitself isn't sexist (I don't know, because I'll never read a Niven \never again after looking briefly at the Man-Kzin Wars / Known Space series);" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That's a bit unfair, since Niven hardly wrote any of the Man-Kzin Wars. I don't remember /Ringworld/ as being especially sexist, but it does contain the line \"Every woman has a tasp.\"? (A tasp is a machine that stimulates the pleasure center.)? And of course most of the characters, human and alien, are male." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Le \nGuin is ... well I don't know what to say. I did not manage to read more \nthan 1 chapter of The Disposessed; she was so intent on banging her drum and \ndrilling into our heads the contrast between her idyllic but backward \negalitarians and the technologically advanced sexist b*****ds." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that /is/ one of the main things the book is about, except that the egalitarians aren't all that idyllic. (Still much better than the capitalists.)? I happen to like that sort of thing at times, and have enjoyed rereading /The Dispossessed/, /That Hideous Strength/, /The Fountainhead/, and for that matter BotLS and BotSS and /The Wizard Knight/, which are by no means free of preaching." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hated the sheer \nmanipulative lameness. Hated every sentence of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I find it interesting to compare this criticism to Wolfe's praise of /The Lord of Rings/ in \"The Best Introduction to the Mountains\". Wolfe clearly liked LotR for non-political reasons too, but the subject he singles out is its portrayal of societies that he considers better than ours. True, Tolkien spends far less time than Le Guin on the way the societies work--so much less that I think it undermines Wolfe's point--but sociopolitical aspects such as the relationship between Frodo and Sam, and the restoration of the true king, are fundamental to LotR, as is the immorality of greed for wealth and power." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Only Le Guin adult fic I ever managed to finish was The Lathe of Heaven. On the \nother hand I loved the original Earthsea series, though not the follow-up \nrecantations (should have said 'quod scripsi scripsi, deal with it, IMO)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...\n\nAs I recall, /Tehanu/ might have recanted a flaw of the three original books (\"weak as woman's magic\"), but /The Other Wind/ seemed like a retelling of /The Farthest Shore/. Did it recant something? The same thing?\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1312728859.71813.YahooMailClassic@web161802.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T14:54:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) from each according to his abilities (was: Gollancz list\n\t(was: Re: Book of the New Sun won!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Sun, 8/7/11, David Duffy wrote:\nOn Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Marc Aramini\nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "When I worked for my wife's family circus I saw the\nevils of socialism: from each according to his abilities\n(mostly mine), to each according to his needs (mostly not\nmine)? and when times are tough, nothing." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You knew someone would not resist :)\n\nAnd all that believed were together, and had all things\ncommon. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted\nthem to all men, as every man had need.\n\nCheers, David Duffy." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks all for the interesting responses. I wanted to elaborate on this really quickly, because something like this happened. I will reply off list in the future since this is extremely un-Wolfe related but I thought this was interesting. This is the only post I will make about it, skip it if you find it too far from the lists concerns. There is Wolfe's response to the situation at the end of it, though.\n\nAfter a near lethal car accident going back and forth to visit my circus girlfriend, in order that we could be together she convinced me to ask her father for job since she did not want to leave that lifestyle, and he said, okay, but you have to get married. They are mostly Spanish speaking Mexican Catholics and have been in that travelling performing lifestyle for 5 generations, and travelling there was only so much room, so while they were in Vegas I pretty much sold EVERYTHING I had collected over the years that didn't fit in my new RV at a garage sale tey held, and they kept the proceeds for the one house that served like 25 people. (that was fine with me then, I needed to get rid of stuff!) \n\nThe problem was that it turned out I was the best equipped to deal with permits (planning, building and safety, fire, health, animal control, business license, etc) with instituting and running an ATM and credit card machine, with stocking and running the concession, with making deals with the property owners and scheduling the route, and since I was fit they also expected me to perform (learned a handstand act), and for the first two years I also did the heavy manual labor of tearing down and setting up the tent and bleachers that all men were expected to do. They would throw visa problems to me, throw tax problems to me, and when it was pay day every week my wife and I would get our 500 dollars before taxes total (250/person) or less if business was bad, (usually individual artists made that or closer to 400) but no one else had those extra responsibilities that I was uniquely qualified for. The second year I managed to gain a percentage of the\n concession sales, but he cut it again the third year, while my responsibilities continued to grow, facing the hostile and unfriendly inspectors and city governments and councils on my own and the increasing laziness of everyone else in the business, hiding behind a mask of incompetence. When someone els did anything it just wasn't done right and I would have to go fix it anyway (I think this was on purpose)\n\nThey would always ask me to share my good credit score so they could buy new RVs, etc, but I always refused. (very few of them were even on the vehicle loans in name, its just how they operated)\n\nI would often complain to my wife, but she never went against her father, for though the system was socialist it also seemed definitely non-benignly tyrannical at the top distribution level. She was not prepared to leave her family, so eventually I left by myself, for those reasons and others.\n\nMy friend Gene Wolfe told me in correspondence during this time, to paraphrase, \"I'm not going to tell you that you love her more than she loves you, but then you knew that already.\"\n\nAnyway, I found a purely secular sharing of goods and resources and responsibilities like that sucks in practice and parasitizes the most able." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T16:11:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New Sun\n\twonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "When I worked for my wife's family circus I saw the evils of socialism: from each according to his abilities (mostly mine), to each according to his needs (mostly not mine) and when times are tough, nothing." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You knew someone would not resist :)\n\nAnd all that believed were together, and had all things common. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "One point, the things shared in common at this time, were shared voluntarily at the household level. As Peter says to Ananias (who lied about the *percentage* he gave from the proceeds of a sale): \nActs 5:4 \"Before you sold the land, wasn't it your own? And after it was sold weren't you free to do with it as you wanted?\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jack Smith", "address": "jack.smith.1946 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T18:56:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) from each according to his abilities (was: Gollancz list\n (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won!)", "in_reply_to": "<1312728859.71813.YahooMailClassic@web161802.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm not convinced that this is socialism or that it tells us anything about\na socialist system of government. You entered into a family business and\nyou worked at it. Perhaps you worked harder than others; perhaps others\nthought they worked harder than you. You grew disenchanted and you left,\nbut there must have been rewards for you to stay as long as you did.\n\nYou might draw a very different conclusion from the same circumstances:\nThat monarchy (the rule of one man who has inherited his position as the\nhead of the family) exploits the lower classes, such as yourself.\n\nAt any rate, it sounds like an interesting experience." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On Sun, 8/7/11, David Duffy wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Sat, 6 Aug 2011, Marc Aramini\nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "When I worked for my wife's family circus I saw the\nevils of socialism: from each according to his abilities\n(mostly mine), to each according to his needs (mostly not\nmine) and when times are tough, nothing." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You knew someone would not resist :)\n\nAnd all that believed were together, and had all things\ncommon. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted\nthem to all men, as every man had need.\n\nCheers, David Duffy." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Thanks all for the interesting responses. I wanted to elaborate on this\nreally quickly, because something like this happened. I will reply off list\nin the future since this is extremely un-Wolfe related but I thought this\nwas interesting. This is the only post I will make about it, skip it if you\nfind it too far from the lists concerns. There is Wolfe's response to the\nsituation at the end of it, though.\n\nAfter a near lethal car accident going back and forth to visit my circus\ngirlfriend, in order that we could be together she convinced me to ask her\nfather for job since she did not want to leave that lifestyle, and he said,\nokay, but you have to get married. They are mostly Spanish speaking Mexican\nCatholics and have been in that travelling performing lifestyle for 5\ngenerations, and travelling there was only so much room, so while they were\nin Vegas I pretty much sold EVERYTHING I had collected over the years that\ndidn't fit in my new RV at a garage sale tey held, and they kept the\nproceeds for the one house that served like 25 people. (that was fine with\nme then, I needed to get rid of stuff!)\n\nThe problem was that it turned out I was the best equipped to deal with\npermits (planning, building and safety, fire, health, animal control,\nbusiness license, etc) with instituting and running an ATM and credit card\nmachine, with stocking and running the concession, with making deals with\nthe property owners and scheduling the route, and since I was fit they also\nexpected me to perform (learned a handstand act), and for the first two\nyears I also did the heavy manual labor of tearing down and setting up the\ntent and bleachers that all men were expected to do. They would throw visa\nproblems to me, throw tax problems to me, and when it was pay day every week\nmy wife and I would get our 500 dollars before taxes total (250/person) or\nless if business was bad, (usually individual artists made that or closer to\n400) but no one else had those extra responsibilities that I was uniquely\nqualified for. The second year I managed to gain a percentage of the\n concession sales, but he cut it again the third year, while my\nresponsibilities continued to grow, facing the hostile and unfriendly\ninspectors and city governments and councils on my own and the increasing\nlaziness of everyone else in the business, hiding behind a mask of\nincompetence. When someone els did anything it just wasn't done right and I\nwould have to go fix it anyway (I think this was on purpose)\n\nThey would always ask me to share my good credit score so they could buy\nnew RVs, etc, but I always refused. (very few of them were even on the\nvehicle loans in name, its just how they operated)\n\nI would often complain to my wife, but she never went against her father,\nfor though the system was socialist it also seemed definitely non-benignly\ntyrannical at the top distribution level. She was not prepared to leave her\nfamily, so eventually I left by myself, for those reasons and others.\n\nMy friend Gene Wolfe told me in correspondence during this time, to\nparaphrase, \"I'm not going to tell you that you love her more than she loves\nyou, but then you knew that already.\"\n\nAnyway, I found a purely secular sharing of goods and resources and\nresponsibilities like that sucks in practice and parasitizes the most able.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3EE9CC.5000609@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2011-08-07T19:38:52+00:00", "subject": "(urth) from each according to his abilities (was: Gollancz list\n (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/7/2011 1:56 PM, Jack Smith wrote:\nYou might draw a very different conclusion from the same circumstances:\n That monarchy (the rule of one man who has inherited his position as\nthe head of the family) exploits the lower classes, such as yourself." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"it also seemed definitely non-benignly tyrannical at the top \ndistribution level.\"\n\nRemember folks, top posting and bulk-quoting not only makes the baby \nTheoanthropos cry, it helps you miss the obvious!" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at clueland.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "davidd at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2011-08-07T21:57:48+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list (was: Re: Book of the New\n\tSunwonthecontest!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, 7 Aug 2011, David Duffy wrote:\nActually, this makes we wonder if there are any Wolfean allusions to \nWilliams? I have never read _A computer iterates the greater trumps_ -- is \nthere anything there?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Answering my own question. No." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3FE4B9.6020707@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-08T13:29:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/7/2011 3:51 AM, David Duffy wrote:\nI found _His Hideous Strength_ unreadable for that reason, but not the \nfirst two of the Space Trilogy. But everything by Charles Williams is \ndelicious. Actually, this makes we wonder if there are any Wolfean \nallusions to Williams? I have never read _A computer iterates the \ngreater trumps_ -- is there anything there?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting. I found _Perelandra_ much more preachy than _That Hideous \nStrength_ -- one metaphor after another. And for that reason found it \ntedious to work through (even though a couple of the lessons are pretty \ngood ones). _THS_ did have nasty villains of a very tendentious type, \nbut each was a quite unique character of a particular kind of \nintellectual. The novel was very much character-driven (with the \nexception of Ransom whose character-- for this novel -- withdrew into \nthe wallpaper. But that is for the good of the story IMO). When I first \nread it as a teenager, I had never before read anything that so casually \ndispensed with the \"walls\" I believed surrounded genres (SF, Fantasy, \nSpy Thriller).\n\nJ.\n\nPS Some are revolted by Merlin's severe chastisement of \"the wife\" for \nusing birth-control. But I think this ought to be juxtaposed with the \notter martians in _Out of the Silent Planet_ who couldn't understand \nthat some humans had as many children as they could. For that reason, \nI'm not certain that Lewis's own opinion can be derived from these bits. \nIt is merely different points of view: One from a species that has for \nmillennia lived in scarcity and one from a man who can see \"what might \nhave been\"." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4E3FF2B8.3050602@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-08-08T14:29:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) from each according to his abilities (was: Gollancz list\n (was: Re: Book of the New Sun won!)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/7/2011 1:56 PM, Jack Smith wrote:\nI'm not convinced that this is socialism or that it tells us anything \nabout a socialist system of government. You entered into a family \nbusiness and you worked at it. Perhaps you worked harder than \nothers; perhaps others thought they worked harder than you. You grew \ndisenchanted and you left, but there must have been rewards for you to \nstay as long as you did." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I believe the moral of Marc's story is that there were not rewards. He \nspeculated on a socialist system in *hope* that he would gain the love \nof a woman -- and perhaps he presumed he would also gain the respect of \nher family. Ultimately he gained neither. He speculated and lost his \ninvestment. In Life, we are all capitalists." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You might draw a very different conclusion from the same \ncircumstances: That monarchy (the rule of one man who has inherited \nhis position as the head of the family) exploits the lower classes, \nsuch as yourself." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Every system that involves an attempt to \"fairly\" divide scarce \nresources among many involves a person or organization who determines \nthe meaning of the word, who are the needy, who are the able, who are \nthe deserving, who are the gluttons. That person or persons is empowered \nby that responsibility. Every such system breaks down (if/when it breaks \ndown) at the point of actual *work* -- the place where limited, \nfallible, greedy humans start cutting portions. The cleverness of Adam \nSmith economics is that Smith largely refuted the need for such a person \nor persons.\n\nFor more on this, check out Wolfe ingenious propaganda piece \"The Devil \nin a Forest.\"\n\nJ." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "davidd at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2011-08-08T21:17:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Gollancz list", "in_reply_to": "<4E3FE4B9.6020707@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, James Wynn wrote:\nInteresting. I found _Perelandra_ much more preachy than _That Hideous \nStrength_ -- one metaphor after another. And for that reason found it tedious \nto work through (even though a couple of the lessons are pretty good ones)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The secret is willing suspension of one's allegory detection sense. \nWasn't it Tolkein who said \"when I see an allegory, I reach for my \nrevolver\"? I quite enjoyed _Pilgrim's Progress_ (when younger) via this \nmethod, and it helps to maintain the magic in some of James Branch Cabell. \nAfter all, I work quite close to Fortitude Valley, but have long since \nworn away any meaning in the name.\n\nCheers, David Duffy." } ] } ] }