{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6694", "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": 6694, "subject": "Wolfe and the Ancient world", "messages": 4, "voices": 4, "first": "2014-11-03T15:46:41+00:00", "last": "2014-11-04T13:28:06+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andreas Johansson", "address": "andreas.havok at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-11-03T15:46:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe and the Ancient world", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Just started reading *Soldier of Sidon*, after a break in my Wolfe\nconsumtion. Regarding the foreword - I think it was signed by \"G.W.\" or\nGene Wolfe in the *Latro in the Mist* omnibus, but it isn't credited to\nanyone in Sidon - he makes a couple of seemingly erudite claims about\nancient Egypt, or rather the historical study of it. I'm just wondering,\nhow true are these claims? I mean, does it hold up in the light of real\nlife Egyptology/ancient history/archaeology? Especially regarding the\narmies and weaponry of Egypt and the Nubians.\n\n(a side-note regarding Wolfe's Catholicism: I'm a born and raised Atheist,\nwith increasing Agnostic tendencies. It wasn't until I started following\nthis list that I understood that Wolfe was, indeed, a practicing Catholic,\nand then I had already read through BotNS at least twice, so no, you can\ndefinitely enjoy Wolfe without one inch of faith in Yahve/the Increate or\nhis prophet(s) - however, reading Wolfe, and following your insightful\ndebates & analyses on this list, my understanding of not just Catholic\nfaith but the nature of religious beliefs in general has definitely\ndeveloped massively, much more than though any church visit or Sunday TV\nsermon in my adult life. Thus, if I suddenly convert in a couple of years,\nold Gene is probably to blame.).\n\n\nyrs,\n\n/Andreas" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-11-03T17:21:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe and the Ancient world", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Andreas,\n\nI agree that you don't need any knowledge of Catholic or Christian faith to\nunderstand, well, _most_ Wolfe stories (\"The Detective of Dreams\" comes to\nmind as a counter-example). But such knowledge enriches one's reading of\nmany of his stories.\n\nWolfe definitely played a (small) part in my conversion from generic\nChristian to Catholicism." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Andreas Johansson \nwrote:\nJust started reading *Soldier of Sidon*, after a break in my Wolfe\nconsumtion. Regarding the foreword - I think it was signed by \"G.W.\" or\nGene Wolfe in the *Latro in the Mist* omnibus, but it isn't credited to\nanyone in Sidon - he makes a couple of seemingly erudite claims about\nancient Egypt, or rather the historical study of it. I'm just wondering,\nhow true are these claims? I mean, does it hold up in the light of real\nlife Egyptology/ancient history/archaeology? Especially regarding the\narmies and weaponry of Egypt and the Nubians.\n\n(a side-note regarding Wolfe's Catholicism: I'm a born and raised Atheist,\nwith increasing Agnostic tendencies. It wasn't until I started following\nthis list that I understood that Wolfe was, indeed, a practicing Catholic,\nand then I had already read through BotNS at least twice, so no, you can\ndefinitely enjoy Wolfe without one inch of faith in Yahve/the Increate or\nhis prophet(s) - however, reading Wolfe, and following your insightful\ndebates & analyses on this list, my understanding of not just Catholic\nfaith but the nature of religious beliefs in general has definitely\ndeveloped massively, much more than though any church visit or Sunday TV\nsermon in my adult life. Thus, if I suddenly convert in a couple of years,\nold Gene is probably to blame.).\n\n\nyrs,\n\n/Andreas\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-11-04T01:35:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe as conversionist", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No dia 03/11/2014, ?s 17:21, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Wolfe definitely played a (small) part in my conversion from generic Christian to Catholicism." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think for many Wolfe - like so many others and other things, but let's say Wolfe since we're talking about Wolfe - may first play the role of intellectual disruptor: he _can_ make people understand that things are not so simple as they had thought.\n\nBut many are not stuck at that point. In this list, for instance, Lee has had the opportunity to articulate masterfully some of the things that religious folks usually think only they understand, and yet Lee is not a believer. Because to be a believer one actually has to believe in God, and that doesn't even mean believing in the Bible; it means feeling the presence of God, even if only at times, and then accepting religious belief as an explanation for that feeling. Now, some don't feel God because they've shut their senses, or fight against them, or never developed them in the first place, but none of those states has to be permanent. Art like Wolfe's may contribute to free one from the need to fight God, but it can't do everything. And certainly for some that would be considered a step backwards." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Otto Jack Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-11-04T13:28:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfe as conversionist", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well put, Antonio. Some take Wolfe's open-ended and polyvalent narrations\nas evidence of either a lack of commitment to any certain set of beliefs on\nhis own part, or lack of a desire for his readers to commit to a particular\nset of beliefs - or both. But I think the ployvalence is there because it\nis one of the best ways to open people up to whole new conceptions. It's\nnot there to make them think all conceptions are equal (which really means\nequally false). I still think a sympathetic reader can see that Wolfe is\nrooting for the reader to embrace a certain central set of beliefs (just as\nsome of his characters do - or try to do as best they can). I would say\nthat whether I myself were a 'believer' or not. It's just the most astute\nway to read him.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques \nwrote:\nNo dia 03/11/2014, ?s 17:21, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \nescreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Wolfe definitely played a (small) part in my conversion from generic\nChristian to Catholicism." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think for many Wolfe - like so many others and other things, but let's\nsay Wolfe since we're talking about Wolfe - may first play the role of\nintellectual disruptor: he _can_ make people understand that things are not\nso simple as they had thought.\n\nBut many are not stuck at that point. In this list, for instance, Lee has\nhad the opportunity to articulate masterfully some of the things that\nreligious folks usually think only they understand, and yet Lee is not a\nbeliever. Because to be a believer one actually has to believe in God, and\nthat doesn't even mean believing in the Bible; it means feeling the\npresence of God, even if only at times, and then accepting religious belief\nas an explanation for that feeling. Now, some don't feel God because\nthey've shut their senses, or fight against them, or never developed them\nin the first place, but none of those states has to be permanent. Art like\nWolfe's may contribute to free one from the need to fight God, but it can't\ndo everything. And certainly for some that would be considered a step\nbackwards.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] } ] }