{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6247", "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": 6247, "subject": "Sorcerer's House Comment", "messages": 20, "voices": 12, "first": "2012-05-03T20:18:07+00:00", "last": "2012-05-10T14:49:35+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Fred Kiesche", "address": "godelescherbach at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-03T20:18:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/06/books/review/neil-gaiman-shares-his-reading-habits.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all\n\n=====\n\n\n*What was the last truly great book you read?*\n\n?The Sorcerer’s House, by Gene Wolfe, amazed me. It was such a cunning\nbook, and it went so deep. A foxy fantasy about a house that grows, with\nchapters that are the Greater Trumps of a tarot deck.\n=====" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "F.P. Kiesche III \"Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book. Always,\nscribble, scribble, scribble, eh?\" (The Duke of Gloucester, on being\npresented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.)\nBlogging at The Lensman's Children (\nhttp://theeternalgoldenbraid.blogspot.com/)." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Gwern Branwen", "address": "gwern0 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-03T20:44:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Fred Kiesche wrote:\n?The Sorcerer’s House, by Gene Wolfe, amazed me. It was such a cunning\nbook, and it went so deep. A foxy fantasy about a house that grows, with\nchapters that are the Greater Trumps of a tarot deck." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hm, we didn't think it was very deep - Bax was indeed the evil twin\nwho by the end murders his brother and usurps his wife and\npossessions, just like Emlyn was the evil twin and Ieyuan\nmisunderstood. Maybe we missed something by not looking at the Greater\nTrumps?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "gwern\nhttp://www.gwern.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Fred Kiesche", "address": "godelescherbach at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-03T20:46:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Or...we have read a lot of Wolfe. Gaiman is talking to an audience who\nprobably has never heard of Wolfe. So he might be aiming his remarks to get\nfolks interested and actually pick up a book." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Gwern Branwen wrote:\nOn Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Fred Kiesche \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "“The Sorcerer’s House, by Gene Wolfe, amazed me. It was such a cunning\nbook, and it went so deep. A foxy fantasy about a house that grows, with\nchapters that are the Greater Trumps of a tarot deck." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hm, we didn't think it was very deep - Bax was indeed the evil twin\nwho by the end murders his brother and usurps his wife and\npossessions, just like Emlyn was the evil twin and Ieyuan\nmisunderstood. Maybe we missed something by not looking at the Greater\nTrumps”\n\n--\ngwern\nhttp://www.gwern.net\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-03T21:00:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Aside from some of his own great stuff, I'll never stop liking and being\ngrateful to Neil for bigging up my two faves: Wolfe and Lafferty. From\nthe same interview:\n\n*If you could meet any writer, dead or alive, who would it be? What would\nyou want to know? Have you ever written to an author?*\n\nAs a teenager I wrote to R. A. Lafferty. And he responded, too, with\nletters that were like R. A. Lafferty short stories, filled with elliptical\nanswers to straight questions and simple answers to complicated ones.\n\nHe was a sui generis writer, the oddest and most frustratingly delightful\nof American tall-tale tellers. Not a lot of people have read him, and even\nfewer like what he wrote, but those of us who like him like him all the\nway. We never met.\n\nThe last time I wrote to Lafferty, he had Alzheimer’s and was in a home in\nOklahoma, shortly before his death, and I do not believe he read or\nunderstood the letter, but it made me feel like I was doing something right\nby writing it and sending it.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Fred Kiesche wrote:\n\nhttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/06/books/review/neil-gaiman-shares-his-reading-habits.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all\n\n=====\n\n\n*What was the last truly great book you read?*\n\n?The Sorcerer’s House, by Gene Wolfe, amazed me. It was such a cunning\nbook, and it went so deep. A foxy fantasy about a house that grows, with\nchapters that are the Greater Trumps of a tarot deck.\n=====\n\n--\nF.P. Kiesche III \"Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book.\nAlways, scribble, scribble, scribble, eh?\" (The Duke of Gloucester, on\nbeing presented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.)\nBlogging at The Lensman's Children (\nhttp://theeternalgoldenbraid.blogspot.com/).\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "nate jarvis", "address": "natejarv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T12:56:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Was it 2 sets of twins in TSH? Or did they send one human and a\nchangeling back to the real world and keep one human and a changeling\nin faerie (ie, is Bax a changeling, or a human, and if he's a human is\none the twins from faerie his brother and the other a changeling meant\nto pass as him?)\n\nNate." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Antonin Scriabin", "address": "kierkegaurdian at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T13:38:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Neil Gaiman rubbed shoulders with a bunch of big writers (Wolfe, Lafferty,\nDouglas Adams). I have liked his stuff for the most part, although\nAmerican Gods and Neverwhere weren't anywhere near as good as Sandman or\nFragile Things." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:56 AM, nate jarvis wrote:\nWas it 2 sets of twins in TSH? Or did they send one human and a\nchangeling back to the real world and keep one human and a changeling\nin faerie (ie, is Bax a changeling, or a human, and if he's a human is\none the twins from faerie his brother and the other a changeling meant\nto pass as him?)\n\nNate.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T14:26:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I tend to agree. He always seems best when he's doing something oblique, like collaborating or writing for varied formats. I don't think that's a bad thing because parts of Sandman stand up with the best sf writing. But he's always described himself more as a storyteller in something of an old fashioned sense rather tha \"a writer,\" and I think that's apt.\n\nI also think of him as a channeler of other things to broader audiences. That's not only because he always promos people I like, but even stuff like Sandman brought some \"literary\" stuff to comics, and it brought non-comics readers to graphic novels, etc. He makes people who don't like genre stuff...like genre stuff, and that's a good thing. He also just seems to me like a guy who \"gets it\" in all the right ways, both in terms of knowing what's good (anything he edits is worth the price) and in knowing what he does best for the most part." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On May 4, 2012, at 8:38 AM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:\nNeil Gaiman rubbed shoulders with a bunch of big writers (Wolfe, Lafferty, Douglas Adams). I have liked his stuff for the most part, although American Gods and Neverwhere weren't anywhere near as good as Sandman or Fragile Things.\n\nOn Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:56 AM, nate jarvis wrote:\nWas it 2 sets of twins in TSH? Or did they send one human and a\nchangeling back to the real world and keep one human and a changeling\nin faerie (ie, is Bax a changeling, or a human, and if he's a human is\none the twins from faerie his brother and the other a changeling meant\nto pass as him?)\n\nNate.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Darth Ed", "address": "darthed77 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T14:33:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On May 3, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Gwern Branwen wrote:\nMaybe we missed something by not looking at the Greater Trumps?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think so. I'd certainly be interested in the definitive Tarot reading of\nTSH. I'm not sure anyone has quite cracked it yet, other than perhaps\nGaiman.\n\nGaiman has mentioned the similarities to the Tarot before in his review of\nTSH on GoodReads (http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/97189634), and it's\nbeen discussed on this mailing list by Dave Stockhoff, Dave Tallman, and\nothers. Dave Tallman got the furthest, I think. Relevant links:\n\nhttp://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2010-April/014621.html\nhttp://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2010-April/014624.html\nhttp://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2010-April/014631.html\n\nBut, alas, the topic is dropped just as the list starts to make some\nprogress.\n\nBackground for those who missed the Tarot discussion the first time:\n\nWikipedia says: \"The Major Arcana (greater secrets), or trump cards,\nconsists of 22 cards without suits: The Fool, The Magician, The High\nPriestess, The Empress, The Emperor, The Hierophant, The Lovers, The\nChariot, Strength, The Hermit, Wheel of Fortune, Justice, The Hanged Man,\nDeath, Temperance, The Devil, The Tower, The Star, The Moon, The Sun,\nJudgement, and The World.\"\n\nThere are 44 letters/chapters in TSH, exactly twice the number of cards in\nthe Major Arcana. Two of the letters (letters 22 and 23) have the same\ntitle (\"Silver Bullets\"). Presumably, we have a double deck of the Major\nArcana with each letter can be associated with one of the cards of the\nMajor Arcana in some fashion. Also, the repetition of \"Silver Bullets\" at\nexactly the midpoint of the book implies a thematic mirroring relationship\nto the letters on either side of the midpoint.\n\nHope this spurs some additional analysis,\nEd\n\nMy WolfeWiki profile: http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Profiles.DarthEd" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1336142518.80354.YahooMailClassic@web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T14:41:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 5/4/12, Darth Ed wrote:\n I'm not sure anyone has quite cracked it yet, other" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "than perhaps\nGaiman." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've never been convinced that Gaiman is necessarily a great interpretive analyst. His strengths are elsewhere." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T15:30:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think *Anansi Boys* is his best novel, far tighter than *American\nGods*(you can feel a lot of both Wolfe's and Lafferty's influences in\nthose two\nnovels I think). He is, though, like you've noted he acknowledged, a\nbetter 'storyteller' than 'writer' and best as a sort of artist-activist\nwho gets great things known to diverse audiences. You can't help but like\nthe guy.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:\n I tend to agree. He always seems best when he's doing something oblique,\nlike collaborating or writing for varied formats. I don't think that's a\nbad thing because parts of Sandman stand up with the best sf writing. But\nhe's always described himself more as a storyteller in something of an old\nfashioned sense rather tha \"a writer,\" and I think that's apt.\n\nI also think of him as a channeler of other things to broader audiences.\nThat's not only because he always promos people I like, but even stuff like\nSandman brought some \"literary\" stuff to comics, and it brought non-comics\nreaders to graphic novels, etc. He makes people who don't like genre\nstuff...like genre stuff, and that's a good thing. He also just seems to me\nlike a guy who \"gets it\" in all the right ways, both in terms of knowing\nwhat's good (anything he edits is worth the price) and in knowing what he\ndoes best for the most part.\n\n\nOn May 4, 2012, at 8:38 AM, Antonin Scriabin \nwrote:\n\n Neil Gaiman rubbed shoulders with a bunch of big writers (Wolfe,\nLafferty, Douglas Adams). I have liked his stuff for the most part,\nalthough American Gods and Neverwhere weren't anywhere near as good as\nSandman or Fragile Things.\n\nOn Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:56 AM, nate jarvis wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Was it 2 sets of twins in TSH? Or did they send one human and a\nchangeling back to the real world and keep one human and a changeling\nin faerie (ie, is Bax a changeling, or a human, and if he's a human is\none the twins from faerie his brother and the other a changeling meant\nto pass as him?)\n\nNate.\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Gwern Branwen", "address": "gwern0 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-04T15:32:57+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<1336142518.80354.YahooMailClassic@web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nI've never been convinced that Gaiman is necessarily a great interpretive analyst. ?His strengths are elsewhere." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\nunreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply gave\nGaiman some hints or something.\n\nI took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\nobvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\nWikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part of the\nplot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\nunscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone pointing out\nany interesting problems with the ordering and giving a revealing true\nordering." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "gwern\nhttp://www.gwern.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "<820215A3-CA35-4951-B3DD-1611977C7CBF@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Darth Ed", "address": "darthed77 at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-07T16:49:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On May 4, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:\nThe book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\nunreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply gave\nGaiman some hints or something." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I concur. That's my feeling as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\nobvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\nWikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part of the\nplot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\nunscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone pointing out\nany interesting problems with the ordering and giving a revealing true\nordering." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think the letters/chapters are out of order per se with regards to\nsome canonical ordering of the Major Arcana and that we need to reorder the\nchapters/letters to fit that canonical ordering. In a Tarot reading, the\ncards are shuffled and the ordering of the cards is significant to the\nperson who is being read by the reader. And I don't think the titles are\nnecessarily related to the Major Arcana, but rather the principle\ncharacters and/or action that takes place in each letter/chapter can be\nmatched to each of the Major Arcana. In that respect, I'm keen on David\nStockoff's interpretation which identified several such matches for a\nhandful of the letters/chapters. He also incorporated the mirroring nicely\ninto his interpretation. His identifications seemed quite reasonable to me,\nand I think further study is warranted and may come up with additional\nidentifications between the letters/chapters and the Major Arcana. I'll\ncertainly be looking for such connection on my next reading of TSH, but I\nsuspect that's probably years from now, unfortunately.\n\nIn a sense, we, the readers of the book, are like the Tarot reader who\nreads the past, present, and future of a person/character. The\ncards/chapters represent the past and the present; the reader interprets\nthem and uses them to foretell the future of the person/character.\n\nLater,\nEd\n\nMy WolfeWiki profile: http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Profiles.DarthEd" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Fred Kiesche", "address": "godelescherbach at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-07T20:47:30+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<820215A3-CA35-4951-B3DD-1611977C7CBF@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tarot: Read a long time ago was NOVA by Samuel R. Delany. I just got a\nhardcover of the \"first\" edition (SFBC, long story as to why that is the\nhardcover). Much of the story revolves around the Tarot; I have not read\nthis in years and will be putting it on Mount Tobereread." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Darth Ed wrote:\nOn May 4, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\nunreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply gave\nGaiman some hints or something." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I concur. That's my feeling as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\nobvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\nWikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part of the\nplot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\nunscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone pointing out\nany interesting problems with the ordering and giving a revealing true\nordering." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think the letters/chapters are out of order per se with regards to\nsome canonical ordering of the Major Arcana and that we need to reorder the\nchapters/letters to fit that canonical ordering. In a Tarot reading, the\ncards are shuffled and the ordering of the cards is significant to the\nperson who is being read by the reader. And I don't think the titles are\nnecessarily related to the Major Arcana, but rather the principle\ncharacters and/or action that takes place in each letter/chapter can be\nmatched to each of the Major Arcana. In that respect, I'm keen on David\nStockoff's interpretation which identified several such matches for a\nhandful of the letters/chapters. He also incorporated the mirroring nicely\ninto his interpretation. His identifications seemed quite reasonable to me,\nand I think further study is warranted and may come up with additional\nidentifications between the letters/chapters and the Major Arcana. I'll\ncertainly be looking for such connection on my next reading of TSH, but I\nsuspect that's probably years from now, unfortunately.\n\nIn a sense, we, the readers of the book, are like the Tarot reader who\nreads the past, present, and future of a person/character. The\ncards/chapters represent the past and the present; the reader interprets\nthem and uses them to foretell the future of the person/character.\n\nLater,\nEd\n\nMy WolfeWiki profile:\nhttp://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Profiles.DarthEd\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4FA84D25.3080202@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-05-07T22:31:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think I know that mountain. Legend says its summit stands unseen above \nthe clouds and may be reached by no man or woman.\n\nI'll have to read NOVA; I find the Tarot interesting as the basis for an \norganizational scheme." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 5/7/2012 4:47 PM, Fred Kiesche wrote:\nTarot: Read a long time ago was NOVA by Samuel R. Delany. I just got a \nhardcover of the \"first\" edition (SFBC, long story as to why that is \nthe hardcover). Much of the story revolves around the Tarot; I have \nnot read this in years and will be putting it on Mount Tobereread.\n\nOn Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Darth Ed > wrote:\n\n On May 4, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:\n > The book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\n > unreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply\n gave\n > Gaiman some hints or something.\n\n I concur. That's my feeling as well.\n\n > I took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\n > obvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\n > Wikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part\n of the\n > plot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\n > unscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone\n pointing out\n > any interesting problems with the ordering and giving a\n revealing true\n > ordering.\n\n I don't think the letters/chapters are out of order per se with\n regards to\n some canonical ordering of the Major Arcana and that we need to\n reorder the\n chapters/letters to fit that canonical ordering. In a Tarot\n reading, the\n cards are shuffled and the ordering of the cards is significant to the\n person who is being read by the reader. And I don't think the\n titles are\n necessarily related to the Major Arcana, but rather the principle\n characters and/or action that takes place in each letter/chapter\n can be\n matched to each of the Major Arcana. In that respect, I'm keen on\n David\n Stockoff's interpretation which identified several such matches for a\n handful of the letters/chapters. He also incorporated the\n mirroring nicely\n into his interpretation. His identifications seemed quite\n reasonable to me,\n and I think further study is warranted and may come up with additional\n identifications between the letters/chapters and the Major Arcana.\n I'll\n certainly be looking for such connection on my next reading of\n TSH, but I\n suspect that's probably years from now, unfortunately.\n\n In a sense, we, the readers of the book, are like the Tarot reader who\n reads the past, present, and future of a person/character. The\n cards/chapters represent the past and the present; the reader\n interprets\n them and uses them to foretell the future of the person/character.\n\n Later,\n Ed\n\n My WolfeWiki profile:\n http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Profiles.DarthEd\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-07T23:47:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<4FA84D25.3080202@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Tarot is not the organizational schema of NOVA, but it's one of\nthe things used to produce meaning." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:31 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nI think I know that mountain. Legend says its summit stands unseen above the\nclouds and may be reached by no man or woman.\n\nI'll have to read NOVA; I find the Tarot interesting as the basis for an\norganizational scheme.\n\n\nOn 5/7/2012 4:47 PM, Fred Kiesche wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Tarot: Read a long time ago was NOVA by Samuel R. Delany. I just got a\nhardcover of the \"first\" edition (SFBC, long story as to why that is the\nhardcover). Much of the story revolves around the Tarot; I have not read\nthis in years and will be putting it on Mount Tobereread.\n\nOn Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Darth Ed > wrote:\n\n? ?On May 4, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:\n? ?> The book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\n? ?> unreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply\n? ?gave\n? ?> Gaiman some hints or something.\n\n? ?I concur. That's my feeling as well.\n\n? ?> I took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\n? ?> obvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\n? ?> Wikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part\n? ?of the\n? ?> plot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\n? ?> unscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone\n? ?pointing out\n? ?> any interesting problems with the ordering and giving a\n? ?revealing true\n? ?> ordering.\n\n? ?I don't think the letters/chapters are out of order per se with\n? ?regards to\n? ?some canonical ordering of the Major Arcana and that we need to\n? ?reorder the\n? ?chapters/letters to fit that canonical ordering. In a Tarot\n? ?reading, the\n? ?cards are shuffled and the ordering of the cards is significant to the\n? ?person who is being read by the reader. And I don't think the\n? ?titles are\n? ?necessarily related to the Major Arcana, but rather the principle\n? ?characters and/or action that takes place in each letter/chapter\n? ?can be\n? ?matched to each of the Major Arcana. In that respect, I'm keen on\n? ?David\n? ?Stockoff's interpretation which identified several such matches for a\n? ?handful of the letters/chapters. He also incorporated the\n? ?mirroring nicely\n? ?into his interpretation. His identifications seemed quite\n? ?reasonable to me,\n? ?and I think further study is warranted and may come up with additional\n? ?identifications between the letters/chapters and the Major Arcana.\n? ?I'll\n? ?certainly be looking for such connection on my next reading of\n? ?TSH, but I\n? ?suspect that's probably years from now, unfortunately.\n\n? ?In a sense, we, the readers of the book, are like the Tarot reader who\n? ?reads the past, present, and future of a person/character. The\n? ?cards/chapters represent the past and the present; the reader\n? ?interprets\n? ?them and uses them to foretell the future of the person/character.\n\n? ?Later,\n? ?Ed\n\n? ?My WolfeWiki profile:\n? ?http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Profiles.DarthEd\n? ?_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "david.duffy at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2012-05-08T01:00:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<4FA84D25.3080202@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, 7 May 2012, David Stockhoff wrote:\nI'll have to read NOVA; I find the Tarot interesting as the basis for an \norganizational scheme." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You've read Calvino, I take it?\n\nCheers, David Duffy." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4FA87A0B.1000802@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-05-08T01:42:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well ferget it then! ;)\n\nI couldn't find it for the Kindle anyway." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 5/7/2012 7:47 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nThe Tarot is not the organizational schema of NOVA, but it's one of\nthe things used to produce meaning." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4FA87A92.7090009@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-05-08T01:44:50+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, but which one? /Castle of Crossed Destinies/? That's on my list...." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 5/7/2012 9:00 PM, David Duffy wrote:\nOn Mon, 7 May 2012, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'll have to read NOVA; I find the Tarot interesting as the basis for \nan organizational scheme." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You've read Calvino, I take it?\n\nCheers, David Duffy.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4FA8AFD7.5090608@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-05-08T05:32:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<820215A3-CA35-4951-B3DD-1611977C7CBF@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 5/7/2012 12:49 PM, Darth Ed wrote:\nOn May 4, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The book *is* dedicated effusively to Gaiman by Wolfe; it's not\nunreasonable to think that Wolfe targeted it at Gaiman or simply gave\nGaiman some hints or something." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I concur. That's my feeling as well." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I took a quick look at the first 6 or 7 chapters. I don't see any\nobvious correspondence with the letter titles and the order given in\nWikipedia, but 'magician' does seem to align with the fish part of the\nplot. Possibly the trumps are a skeleton key to figuring out the\nunscrambled order of the letters? I don't remember anyone pointing out\nany interesting problems with the ordering and giving a revealing true\nordering." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think the letters/chapters are out of order per se with regards to\nsome canonical ordering of the Major Arcana and that we need to reorder the\nchapters/letters to fit that canonical ordering. In a Tarot reading, the\ncards are shuffled and the ordering of the cards is significant to the\nperson who is being read by the reader. And I don't think the titles are\nnecessarily related to the Major Arcana, but rather the principle\ncharacters and/or action that takes place in each letter/chapter can be\nmatched to each of the Major Arcana. In that respect, I'm keen on David\nStockoff's interpretation which identified several such matches for a\nhandful of the letters/chapters. He also incorporated the mirroring nicely\ninto his interpretation. His identifications seemed quite reasonable to me,\nand I think further study is warranted and may come up with additional\nidentifications between the letters/chapters and the Major Arcana. I'll\ncertainly be looking for such connection on my next reading of TSH, but I\nsuspect that's probably years from now, unfortunately.\n\nIn a sense, we, the readers of the book, are like the Tarot reader who\nreads the past, present, and future of a person/character. The\ncards/chapters represent the past and the present; the reader interprets\nthem and uses them to foretell the future of the person/character.\n\nLater,\nEd" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In addition, since the novel is epistolary, IIRC the letters cross \novertly at least once (a standard trick) and maybe less obviously at \nother times. So there is already a chance of \"shuffling,\" which not only \nblows up the idea of an ordered, predictable series but points to the \nshuffling of identities and perhaps memories as well. Pick a card, any card." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andreas Muegge", "address": "dread.dragon at googlemail.com" }, "date": "2012-05-10T14:49:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sorcerer's House Comment", "in_reply_to": "<4FA8AFD7.5090608@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What made me wonder a bit: we know that Gene Wolfe is a master at hiding\nthings in the text. Why has he made it so obvious that Bax has taken over\nthe identity of his brother? Is he luring us on a wrong track so that we\nstop looking deeper?\n\n-Andreas" } ] } ] }