{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/usenet/31", "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": "usenet", "thread": { "id": 31, "subject": "Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "messages": 26, "voices": 17, "first": "1986-01-27T22:25:37+00:00", "last": "1986-02-27T20:56:53+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<194@analog.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Kim Helliwell", "address": "kim at analog.uucp" }, "date": "1986-01-27T22:25:37+00:00", "subject": "Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've seen several kudos on this newsgroup for Gene Wolfe's Book of the New\nSun, and they nearly always prompt the following train of thought in my\nmind:\n\nWhat is it that you who love it (and read and re-read it avidly) see in it\nthat I am missing? I've made it to the end of the second volume, the one\nwhich ends with the invitation to journey further with the protagonist, but\ndoes not blame the reader if he chooses not to--saying \"it is no easy \njourney\". Even up to that point it is no easy journey, so I've paused long\nto consider whether I want to go any further!\n\nI must be missing some crucial point--is it something that will come clear\nif I go on, or would the net advise me to abandon it because, \"if you have\nto ask, you ain't never going to know!\"\n\nIf someone could explain in his own words what it is that Wolfe is trying to\ndo with this work, it might help." } ] }, { "message_id": "<3840005@csd2.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Michaelntz", "address": "krantz at csd2.uucp" }, "date": "1986-01-31T02:03:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<194@analog.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "We are asked:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If someone could explain in his own words what it is that Wolfe is trying to\ndo with this work, it might help." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "hplabs!analog!kim" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What Wolfe is trying to do is raise science fiction to a higher degree\nof literary value than has EVER EXISTED, beyond question. I have read\na hell of a lot of SF and a hell of a lot more `serious' fiction than\nthat (I'm an MA in literature/writing), and all I can tell you, though\nthe Book Of The New Sun is too long and complex for your question to \nbe answerable outside of an extended thesis (shit, I won't pretend I\nreally understand the damn books - they defy that), is that if you are\nnot blown away by now, at the end of the The_Claw_Of_The_Conciliator,\nif you are not shaking your head at Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling\nimagination, his miraculously skilled prose - well, man, go back to\nclowns like Heinlein and Asimov. \n\nGene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down.\n\n- Michael Krantz\n\n\"The text reveals the process of its own production.\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "<11683@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "from": { "name": "David desJardins", "address": "desj at brahms.berkeley.edu" }, "date": "1986-02-02T11:02:49+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<3840005@csd2.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <3840005 at csd2.UUCP> krantz at csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "What Wolfe is trying to do is raise science fiction to a higher degree\nof literary value than has EVER EXISTED, beyond question. I have read\na hell of a lot of SF and a hell of a lot more `serious' fiction than\nthat (I'm an MA in literature/writing), and all I can tell you, though\nthe Book Of The New Sun is too long and complex for your question to \nbe answerable outside of an extended thesis (shit, I won't pretend I\nreally understand the damn books - they defy that), is that if you are\nnot blown away by now, at the end of the The_Claw_Of_The_Conciliator,\nif you are not shaking your head at Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling\nimagination, his miraculously skilled prose - well, man, go back to\nclowns like Heinlein and Asimov. \n\nGene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " I haven't read the books, and for all I know they are God's gift to\nmankind, but however good the books are the above is the definition of\nbullshit. The writer presents the following as facts (not opinions):\n\n1) These books have the most literary value of any SF ever written.\n2) No one can even question this.\n3) He has an MA in literature/writing but can't say why the books are good.\n4) Nor does he understand the books; in fact they defy understanding.\n5) If you didn't love the book you're an idiot.\n6) Once again, Gene Wolfe is the best science fiction author ever.\n\nI for one find this sort of garbage extremely offensive. Is anyone out\nthere interested in answering the original question instead of lecturing\nthe rest of us on our stupidity?\n\n -- David desJardins" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1309@wucec2.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Paul Hahn", "address": "ph at wucec2.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-03T03:21:38+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<194@analog.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <194 at analog.UUCP> kim at analog.UUCP (Kim Helliwell ) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "What is it that you who love it (and read and re-read it avidly) see in it\nthat I am missing? . . .\nIf someone could explain in his own words what it is that Wolfe is trying to\ndo with this work, it might help." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\t I can't tell you what Wolfe is trying to do, but I can tell\n\tyou what I, myself, enjoy about the work. (I've only read it\n\ttwice, but plan to reread it many more times in the future.)\n\tThere are, basically, four things that really appeal to me about\n\tTHE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN:\n\t(1) The world. Wolfe has created a world in these books which\n\thas as much feeling of depth and reality as Middle-Earth or the\n\tLand or anything other created world of which I have read. In\n\taddition, Urth has its own unique flavor, a distinctiveness that\n\tis perhaps unsurpassed in my experience.\n\t(2) The storytelling. The beautiful, beautiful use of the\n\tEnglish language in these books absolutely grips me, though I\n\tcan understand that for some the difficulty of getting through\n\tit would negate its power. Matter of taste, I guess.\n\t(3) The people. As with the world they inhabit, Wolfe's\n\tcharacters are unusual and fascinating. To follow Severian in\n\this physical and spiritual (yech, I hate that word) journey is a\n\tjoy.\n\t(4) The challenge. Throughout most of the four volumes, as I\n\tmarveled at the weird and wonderful images Wolfe showed me I was\n\talso thinking: What the blank is going on? To a certain degree\n\tTHE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN is a puzzle. It involves time in\n\tseveral ways, which creates a profound sense of disorientation\n\tand confusion sometimes, but comes clear (for the most part,\n\tanyway) at the end if one is paying attention. I will be the\n\tfirst to admit that I wasn't (I zipped through THE CITADEL OF\n\tTHE AUTARCH during finals week), which was why many things which\n\tI should have gotten had to wait for my second reading. I am\n\tstill far from a complete understanding of the book, and doubt\n\tthat I shall ever attain one, but I intend to keep trying and\n\tsavoring.\n\t Does that help?\n\t\t\t\t\t\t--pH\n/*\n *\t \"My pen halts, though I do not. Reader, you will walk no\n *\tmore with me. It is time we both take up our lives.\"\n */" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1090@watmath.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Jim Gardner", "address": "jagardner at watmath.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-03T18:20:54+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<11683@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Gene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " I haven't read the books, and for all I know they are God's gift to\nmankind, but however good the books are the above is the definition of\nbullshit. The writer presents the following as facts (not opinions):\n\n1) These books have the most literary value of any SF ever written.\n2) No one can even question this.\n3) He has an MA in literature/writing but can't say why the books are good.\n4) Nor does he understand the books; in fact they defy understanding.\n5) If you didn't love the book you're an idiot.\n6) Once again, Gene Wolfe is the best science fiction author ever.\n\nI for one find this sort of garbage extremely offensive. Is anyone out\nthere interested in answering the original question instead of lecturing\nthe rest of us on our stupidity?\n\n -- David desJardins" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Once in a long while, you read a book and the clouds part and the\nsun shines and your heart begins pumping and your eyes open and you\nsuddenly realize that all your previous notions of what literature\ncan do are feeble and limited. This is an awesome experience...and\nit's a pity that the word \"awesome\" has been so devalued in recent\nyears, because \"awe\" is just as strong and surprising as it was millennia\nago when the human race knew doodly-squat about anything. As Eastern\n(and Western) mystics have repeated down through the years, you can't\nexplain \"awe\" rationally and you can't forcefeed it into someone who\nis not receptive to it. Nevertheless, some things/events/works of art\nare awe-inspiring and those who have felt their impact are changed by\nthe experience.\n\nHigh-falutin' words, and being a child of the cool cynical 70's and\n80's, I would normally gag at the paragraph I just wrote. But I've\nread the Book of the New Sun, and I have to call a masterpiece a\nmasterpiece. In my opinion, the Book of the New Sun is the greatest\npiece of literature ever produced by the English-speaking SF movement.\nI can think of nothing that approaches it. I can think of no other\nbook that would move me to such a trite-sounding contentious statement.\n\nSo the obvious question is, \"Why?\" And it would be a lot easier for\nall concerned if the question had an obvious answer. It doesn't.\nEven worse, I know that any answer I can give is going to trivialize\nsomething that is deep and strong and wise. But here are a variety of\nattempts to say why the Book of the New Sun is awesome:\n\n(1) It expands the limits of what SF can do. Not only is the story\n carried forward by strict narrative, but by philosopical digressions,\n a play, stories told by characters, dream sequences, flashbacks,\n offhand remarks, and so on. The structure is complex, and frankly,\n there are times when you don't know what the hell is going on (at\n least on first reading), but the result is much more satisfying\n than \"First A happened, then B, then C.\" As a reader, you have to\n work and you have to think.\n\n(2) It breaks SF cliches. This is a book with all the SF stock and trade\n turned inside out. Yes, there is space travel, but no one on earth\n cares about it much anymore. Yes, there is time travel (of a sort),\n but it is embodied in a very simple artifact and used for down-to-earth\n purposes. We have a robot in love with a woman, but feeling unworthy\n of her because he has been injured and repaired with human parts, so\n is not a \"whole\" being. The Frankenstein story is turned inside-out,\n none of the aliens behave the way you expect, the hero becomes Supreme\n leader of his commonwealth in a way that is _nothing_ like any SF\n cliche, the great duel that caps the first volume is fought with\n flowers, and on and on.\n\n(3) The book depicts a complete, very human society that is nothing\n like ours. This is often the goal of SF, but you don't realize\n how far short other books come until you read this one. Religion,\n culture, art, cuisine, modes of thought, are all fully envisioned\n and _different_. Simple example: by the time the book takes place,\n relativity and heliocentrism are firmly established in everyday\n life. Therefore, the sun never sets; earth's horizon rises to\n cover the sun. Wolfe never slips into 20th century thought.\n\n(4) The book is rich with allusions, humour, and anything else you\n care to name. Things that immediately come to mind are twists\n on things we would recognize: the hero's attempt at interpreting\n a painting which is actually a photo of Armstrong on the moon;\n a funny/serious recap of the temptations of Christ inside the\n head of a mountain that has been carved to resemble a deceased\n tyrant who isn't quite dead enough; the classic fairy tale romance\n told entirely in what sound like quotations from Chairman Mao.\n Heaven knows how many of these I missed -- I'm told there are a\n lot of allusions to Borges' work, but I didn't catch them.\n\n(5) The prose style is flawless. This doesn't matter to the general\n reader, but it fills the writer in me with envy. Sentences are\n seamless, varied, always easy to understand, never draw attention\n to themselves, until you actually look at what he is pulling off.\n Yes, he uses a vast number of unfamiliar words...but they are\n all nouns for objects/people/institutions that have no present-day\n counterparts. There is none of the Stephen R. Donaldson \"use a\n $10 word in some awkward way just to sound more important\" nonsense.\n\nDoes this answer the question? Probably not -- if the point of the\nwork could be summarized in a few paragraphs, I wouldn't be raving\nabout the book being truly great. It's like trying to explain why\ncold juicy oranges are more satisfying than a Snickers bar; there's\nnothing wrong with Snickers, but oranges at the right time and place\nare blissful.\n\nWill everyone like the Book of the New Sun? Of course not. Some\npeople are looking for different things in their reading material.\nWill everyone understand the Book of the New Sun? Not a chance.\nWhich I think is a bonus. Anything I can understand completely at\nfirst sight is nowhere near the heights to which humans can aspire,\nright? The world is complex, art is not immediately transparent \n(although it may seem very simple), and any work that really tries\nto bite off a piece of immortality is going to have depths that\nonly unfold with thought and time. Literature that fully engages\nthe capacity of an adult mind is not something you can assimilate\nin quick skimming. (IMPORTANT NOTE: I am not saying that a book\nhas to be inaccessible to be good; I don't like books that keep\nme in a constant state of confusion. I am saying that something I\ncan wring totally dry on first reading could well be an enjoyable\nbook, but dammit, we're grown-ups now, and a mature writer spending\nmonths or years producing a piece of literature can put more\nresonances/tricks/delights/ironies into a story than I can pull\nout in a few hours of page turning. There _are_ heights. There\n_are_ books that yield new pleasures and revelations every time you read\nthem. Those show what writing can accomplish.)\n\nIs anyone out there persuaded? If I were someone who hadn't read\nthe books, I would be extremely skeptical of what I have just written.\nBut I hope some people are curious enough that they will go to their\nlocal libraries (it's free!) and get the first volume (The Shadow of\nthe Torturer) to see what it's like. Note that this is not a series,\nbut one book in four volumes, and you'll be lost if you don't read them\nin order.\n\nFor those who have started the book and see no point in continuing,\nso it goes. Some people can look at the Grand Canyon and feel\nawestruck, while others wonder why they drove all the way to Arizona\nto see a big hole in the ground. If the Book of the New Sun does\nnothing for you, life's too short to waste your time slogging through\ntens of thousands of words in the hope that it will all suddenly make\nsense. Look elsewhere for inspiration.\n\nBut it inspired me. A lot.\n\n\t\t\tJim Gardner, University of Waterloo" } ] }, { "message_id": "<639@rti-sel.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "wfi", "address": "wfi at rti-sel.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-03T22:34:35+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<3840005@csd2.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <3840005 at csd2.UUCP> krantz at csd2.UUCP (Michaelntz) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Gene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'd also like to recommend (again) to net.sf-lovers readers the\nexcellent \"Fifth Head Of Cerberus.\"\n\nI think Wolfe's being the \"best SF novelist ever\" is debatable (probably\nendlessly :-). Although Stanislaw Lem's books are uneven in quality,\nat his best I think he's a match for Wolfe. Based, of course, on the\ntranslations that are available of his work. Try the \"Cyberiad\" or\n\"Solaris,\" \"Memoirs Found In A Bathtub\" or \"The Futurological\nCongress\". Or his stranger works like \"A Perfect Vacuum.\"\n\n -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1722@jhunix.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Mark", "address": "ins_amap at jhunix.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-03T23:18:05+00:00", "subject": "Gene Wolf", "in_reply_to": "<11683@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " I haven't read the books, and for all I know they are God's gift to\nmankind, but however good the books are the above is the definition of\nbullshit. The writer presents the following as facts (not opinions):\n\n1) These books have the most literary value of any SF ever written.\n2) No one can even question this.\n3) He has an MA in literature/writing but can't say why the books are good.\n4) Nor does he understand the books; in fact they defy understanding.\n5) If you didn't love the book you're an idiot.\n6) Once again, Gene Wolfe is the best science fiction author ever.\n\nI for one find this sort of garbage extremely offensive. Is anyone out\nthere interested in answering the original question instead of lecturing\nthe rest of us on our stupidity?\n\n -- David desJardins" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm another one of those people to whom Gene Wolf is like unto a god, but\nI have to agree with Mr. desJardins on some of his points. Others are a \nlittle less cut and dried.\n\nPoints 1) and 2) are by definition absurd, or at least unsupportable. There's\nbeen an awful lot of SF written, and a significant portion of that has had\nliterary aspirations. All of Delaney's work, a lot of Ellison (although no\none should tell him that), Tanith Lee's stories, the ones by LeGuin, all\nof those were stories written as something other than hack work. So were most\nof those by almost any other \"name\" author of the past 20 years. And don't \nforget the small-time authors whose work, though well crafted, might have \nslipped by us. Literary value isn't something that can be quantized. Which \nbrings me to point 3).\n\nAll I can say about point 3) is to go out and read _Zen and the Art of\nMotorcycle Maintenance_. The book won't tell you why Gene Wolf is god, but it\nmight help people understand why I can't tell you either. There are novels\nthat are well crafted, that flow easily, that have good dialogue and\ninteresting plot, i.e. technically flawless books that simply aren't as\n_good_ as _The Book of the New Sun_. _Green Eyes_ by Lucius Sheperd comes\nto mind. That book was a first novel, and blew me away, but it still didn't\nhave the impact that the Wolf's novels have had. There are things I\ncould point to in his books and say \"Look, a perfectly crafted section\",\nindicating the allusions, the rythmm of the words, the play on the readers\npoint of view versus the narators, and still you'd be missing the Quality\nof the piece. In that area of art, nothing really has a name, only a presence\nthat either takes the viewer into a new state of being, or does not. Which\nbrings me to my next point.\n\nIn number 5) the original author is paraphrased such that he comes across\nas saying all non-Wolf-worshipers are stupid. I wouldn't have read it quite\nthat harshly, believing there to have been more enthusiasm than spite behind the\nwords. If Wolf's work hits you, it generally hits you hard. If not, it's\nstuff that's a chore to wade through. I've tried to indoctrinate two\ngirlfriends to the Order, with no success. I still like them both (well,\none of them) fine. I wasn't trying to increase their intelligence. I was\ntrying to give them something great and good. There are snobs, even in SF.\nOne of them may be sitting sitting beside you right now, but realize that all\nenthusiasts are also elitists. Bear with the mania of thy neighbor.\n\nPoint 4). \"Understanding\" a book is one thing to work for. For most\npeople it comes easy with most books, and Wolf's books have a perfectly \nunderstandable plot line (until the end when things get hairy, but if you've\ngotten that far you won't mind). There are other things to work for as well.\nFinding all the nuances in the books to be found, that's something no one will\never do. I think that's what the original poster had in mind when he said that\nabout understanding the books. I think someone once defined art as that which\nis always new. Who can understand something that is forever new to them? Who\nwould want to?\n\nAs to who's the best SF author ever, that remains to be seen, doesn't it?\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMark!" } ] }, { "message_id": "<32900037@ISM780.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "jimb", "address": "jimb at ism780.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-04T15:32:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<194@analog.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "...the Book Of The New Sun is too long and complex for your question to\nbe answerable outside of an extended thesis (shit, I won't pretend I\nreally understand the damn books - they defy that)...\n\n...Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling imagination, his miraculously\nskilled prose...\n\nGene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The\nbest. Hands down.\n\n- Michael Krantz" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I will straddle the fence (and probably incur anatomical difficulties as a\nresult). The first two quotes above I agree with, though I do not associate\nmyself with some of the snotty tone in the sections I deleted.\n\nAs to the third quote, while I find it arguable, it *is* arguable, e.g.,\ncan't be dismissed out of hand. The Book of the New Sun is not for plot\nreaders. Wolfe's use of plot is almost completely centered on progressive\nrevelation and illumination of character, that kernel of all good fiction.\n\nTBOTNS is one definition by example of tour de force. He is using SF\nconvention and imagery combined with classical literary technique to portray\nthe life, conflicts, and character development of a fascinating individual in\na fascinating world.\n\nTBOTNS is written with and to a different sensibility than most SF, and like\nall literature, you must accept it on its own terms if it is going to \"work\"\nfor you. If you don't, or for whatever reason can't, such is life.\nRemember, concerning matters of taste, there is no disputing. (An aphorism\nthat antedates my birth by a good couple of millenia.)\n\n\t\t\t-- from the musings of Jim Brunet\n\n\t\t\t ihnp4/ima/ism780B\n\t\t\t hao/ico/ism780B\n\n\t\"In any large scale endeavor that has worked to the benefit of\nmankind, there has been pain and sacrifice and loss. We stand now at one of\nthe pivotal points in history. We can say \"no\" to the unknown mysteries of\nspace, turn our backs, and announce our decline as a civilization. Or we can\nlook at the stars, express our grief at the loss of CHALLENGER and its crew,\nand then honor their lives by saying, 'We shall continue.'\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "<488@hoptoad.uucp>", "from": { "name": "Tim Maroney", "address": "tim at hoptoad.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-05T07:59:42+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1309@wucec2.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Book of the New Sun is in some ways a difficult work. If you don't like\nit, then by all means read something you will ike better. However, since the\nquestion was why others like it...\n\nFirst, ignore the person who said the world is unique. Wrong. Jack Vance\nused it frequently, though Wolfe's variation incorporates some Cordwainer\nSmith as well (you know, when he says \"Atomic Age\" and it *really* sounds\nlike \"Bronze Age\"). Nonetheless, ity is fascinating to modern people to\nexplore a perspective from which we are not only relegated to a historical\njunkpile, but completely forgotten and proven to have no significance\nwhatsoever in the overall history of the world.\n\nThe prose is stunningly crafted. That in itself is not enough to make a\nbook enjoyable -- see William Gibson, who people will get sick of long\nbefore 1988. Nonetheless, at this level it is the best science fiction\never: it almost attains the stature of an epic poem.\n\nRelated to thhe quality of the prose is the quality of the imagery, which\nis peculiarly evocative. All the grains and colors of a Wolfe scene leap\nout with all the attribnutes of a vivid three-dimensional perception\nremembered from childhood. This is done without long, tedious description\nor focusing on surface features.\n\nThe plots are what really make the series. For some reason I have yet\nto figure out, the characters and events really get into my brain and\nreconfigure it into an Escher lithograph. Their raw potency defies\ndescription or summary. If these are not moving you, I don't know what\nto tell you. Do they seem arbitrary? Pointless? Then you and I have\ndifferent worlds, or at least different ways of reading.\n\nI hope this helps. Try to read the Book as if it were an epic poem in\nblank verse, and you may come to appreciate it more.\n\nTim Maroney" } ] }, { "message_id": "<651@edison.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "David C. Albrecht", "address": "dca at edison.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-05T13:37:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<3840005@csd2.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "if you are not shaking your head at Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling\nimagination, his miraculously skilled prose - well, man, go back to\nclowns like Heinlein and Asimov. \n\nGene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Insert rasberry here. I realize that many people believe that these\nbooks are the greatest thing since sliced bread and I wish them all happiness\nin their beliefs. Me, I guess I will stick with clowns :-). I read Shadow\nof the Torturer and thought it was horrible. After reading all the praise\nfor the books I gave them another chance and read the entire Book of the\nNew Sun set. I wasn't particularly fascinated. To me the characters were\nnot particularly interesting. The books were a series of disconnected\nvignettes that I found neither particularly interesting nor imaginative.\nI didn't feel much purpose or direction anywhere. No thanks. We went\nthrough the whole discussion of the subjectiveness of writing in this\ngroup to the point of exhaustion. In your opinion Gene Wolfe is the\nfinest writer in the genre, fine. In my opinion he is not even close\nto the best I would much rather read 'clowns' like Zelazny, McKillip,\nBlish, Biggle, Silverberg, Eddings, Card, Fiest, even some Asimov or Heinlen.\n\nDavid Albrecht" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6881@duke.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Charlie Martin", "address": "crm at duke.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-06T13:24:52+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1090@watmath.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To: mcnc!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!burl!clyde!watmath!jagardner\nSubject: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun\nNewsgroups: net.sf-lovers\nOrganization: Duke University, Durham NC\nCc: \nBcc: \n\nIn article <1090 at watmath.UUCP> you write:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "...so it goes. Some people can look at the Grand Canyon and feel\nawestruck, while others wonder why they drove all the way to Arizona\nto see a big hole in the ground. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And some of us went to the Grand Canyon and found that the old,\nwind-warped timberline pines were far more beautiful, even if the Grand\nCanyon is pretty imressive.\n\nI haven't read \"Book of the New Sun\" because some of the rest of\nWolfe's writing put me off rather badly, and I've only so many hours\nin the day. So maybe I'll try it -- Shadow etc is around here\nsomeplace. But DesJardins has a good point about the posting to\nwhich he responded -- the general tone *was* \"anybody who doesn't\nthink that Gene Wolfe is Ghod's gift to SF is a schmuck.\" And I\nthink he was justly offened. Your posting, while more complete\nand a far better description of the book(s), *still* comes across\n(in my humble opinion [Davis, stop giggling!]) as \"if you don't\nhave a religious experience reading Book of the New Sun, there may be\nsomething seriously wrong with your upbringing.\"\n\nSo cut those of us who prefer a style more like Hemingway a little\nslack, okay?" } ] }, { "message_id": "<32900039@ISM780.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "jimb", "address": "jimb at ism780.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-06T15:12:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<194@analog.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thought I'd jump back in again. Jim Gardner's response (jagardner @ watmath)\nis excellent. I wish *I* had written it and I second practically everything\nhe said -- didn't see anything I wouldn't wholeheartedly agree with on one\nread/think. Thanks, Jim.\n\n\n\t\t\t-- from the musings of Jim Brunet\n\n\t\t\t ihnp4/ima/ism780B\n\t\t\t hao/ico/ism780B\n\n\t\"In any large scale endeavor that has worked to the benefit of\nmankind, there has been pain and sacrifice and loss. We stand now at one of\nthe pivotal points in history. We can say \"no\" to the unknown mysteries of\nspace, turn our backs, and announce our decline as a civilization. Or we can\nlook at the stars, express our grief at the loss of CHALLENGER and its crew,\nand then honor their lives by saying, 'We shall continue.'\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6884@duke.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Ned Danieley", "address": "ndd at duke.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-06T15:56:08+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<651@edison.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <651 at edison.UUCP> dca at edison.UUCP (David C. Albrecht) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "if you are not shaking your head at Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling\nimagination, his miraculously skilled prose - well, man, go back to\nclowns like Heinlein and Asimov. \n\nGene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the\nscience fiction genre. His prose, his ideas - all of it. The \nbest. Hands down." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Insert rasberry here..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": ".\n.\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": ".... In my opinion he is not even close\nto the best I would much rather read 'clowns' like Zelazny, McKillip,\nBlish, Biggle, Silverberg, Eddings, Card, Fiest, even some Asimov or Heinlen.\n\nDavid Albrecht" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I second David's opinion. I got through the books, but I'm not\nsure why.\n\nNed Danieley" } ] }, { "message_id": "<149@slu70.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Guy M. Smith", "address": "guy at slu70.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-06T18:40:12+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1090@watmath.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <1090 at watmath.UUCP>, jagardner at watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I can think of nothing that approaches it. I can think of no other\nbook that would move me to such a trite-sounding contentious statement." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ditto for me. In terms of a fully realized alternate world, the only book that\nI know of that is in the same class as the New Sun is Lord of the Rings. I\nwouldn't attempt to try to compare the two directly as the authors were trying\nto do such different things. Someone else may be braver. As for Wolfe, anyone\nwho can make a sympathetic character out of a torturer has got to be good." } ] }, { "message_id": "<511@oliven.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Barbara Jernigan", "address": "barb at oliven.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-07T22:58:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolf", "in_reply_to": "<1722@jhunix.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Finding all the nuances in the books to be found, that's something no one will\never do. I think that's what the original poster had in mind when he said that\nabout understanding the books. I think someone once defined art as that which\nis always new. Who can understand something that is forever new to them? Who\nwould want to?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If it makes the reader feel any better, sometimes authors are in the same boat.\nTo quote Jung:\n\n The secret of creativeness, like that of the freedom of the will, \n is a transcendental problem which the psychologist cannot answer \n but can only describe. . . . Art is a kind of innate drive that \n seizes a human being and makes him its instrument. The artist is \n not a person endowed with free will who seeks his own ends, but \n one who allows art to realize its purposes through him. . . . As \n K. G. Carus says: \"Strange are the ways by which genius is \n announced, for what distinguishes so supremely endowed a being is \n that, for all the freedom of his life and the clarity of his \n thought, he is everywhere hemmed round and prevailed upon by the \n Unconscious, the mysterious god within him; so that ideas flow to \n him -- he knows not whence; his is driven to work ant to create \n -- he knows not to what end; and is mastered by an impulse for \n constant growth and development -- he knows not whither.\"\n\nIn my own work, I have found myself unconsciously foreshadowing later events --\nand was aware of the foreshadowing only within the second and third passes.\nIs strange, remaining inexplicable (but pretty neat). When the writer says,\n\"The book wrote itself,\" he/she is not lying or belittling his/her craft.\nThe ideas, hard as they are, are not the hardest part. The *hard* part is\nturning the idea into something readable. But I digress." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "As to who's the best SF author ever, that remains to be seen, doesn't it?\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMark!" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Best.\" Do I know that word? ;-)\n\nBarb" } ] }, { "message_id": "<653@edison.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "David C. Albrecht", "address": "dca at edison.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-10T14:10:51+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1090@watmath.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Once in a long while, you read a book and the clouds part and the\nsun shines and your heart begins pumping and your eyes open and you\nsuddenly realize that all your previous notions of what literature\ncan do are feeble and limited.... (lots more)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Though as I stated before I was not impressed by the Book of the New Sun,\nI was impressed by this review. It was obvious the author was very taken\nby these books and to some degree he even managed to get across why.\nCertainly it came light years closer to making me want to get down the\nbooks and look at them than the original response. Variety of taste\ncan, do, and hopefully always will exist. Discussions of what really\nstruck you as profound or meaningful in a book might make others see\nthose things for themselves. Impugning someone because they don't think\nor feel exactly like you do usually just pisses them off (I know it does\nme). Thank you for an intelligent, well thought response to this query\nit at least gave me more insight into what makes a number of people\nso ecstatic about these books.\n\nDavid Albrecht" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1181@watmath.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Jim Gardner", "address": "jagardner at watmath.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-11T22:59:40+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun (Spoilers possible)", "in_reply_to": "<1090@watmath.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[...]\n\nI'm not sure I want to become known as the resident Book of\nthe New Sun fanatic, so I'm hesitant to expand on my previous posting.\nHowever, a few points:\n\n\tI took great pains to avoid saying anything patronizing\n\tto people who didn't like the book. Heaven knows, I've\n\thad people tell me, \"This book changed my life\" and found\n\tthat when I read it, I hated it. I also took great pains\n\tnot to say that Gene Wolfe is the greatest living SF writer.\n\tI don't like statements like that. \"Greatness\" is made up\n\tof more things than writing one great book.\n\n\tFor the people who were quick to write me and inform me\n\tthat my attitude is full of shit, all I can say is \"Not\n\teverything that SOUNDS like bullshit IS bullshit\"\n\nAnd some answers to questions.\nIn article <168 at ucdavis.UUCP> ccrrick at deneb.UUCP writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "So many of the characters seem to be insane and therefore take actions\nthat appear illogical: Master Palaemon gives an extremely valuable\nsword to a man who never seemed to interest him and who ought to be\nsentenced to death. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you trust an author, you say that irrational actions are hints to\nsomething else. In particular (SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER): Master\nPalaemon notes that one other torturer fouled up and was banished for\na time from the guild. In Citadel of the Autarch, it becomes clear\nthat the person in question was Palaemon himself and that he went\nthrough many of the same places and experiences that Severian did.\n(Severian notes early on that Palaemon is a complicated man attempting\nto seem simple.) In fact, the odds are good that Palaemon picked up\nthe sword in his travels in the outside world. With this in mind,\nthe gift makes a great deal more sense.\n\nThe rationality of Dr. Talos, Baldanders and the stuttering" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "man seem questionable to me as well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dr.Talos and Baldanders are indeed interesting characters, and\nboth somewhat more than human. Many mysteries about them are solved in\nSword of the Lictor." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "One thing that intrigues me is the theory that Severian has lived this\nlife before and that all the events depicted have been experienced by\nSeverian not once, but twice. Anyone have any thoughts or theories on\nthis? What made someone think of this rather unique thought in\nthe first place? What evidence is there for it?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Severian himself claims this to be true in Citadel of the Autarch.\nAt the risk of bringing things down to SF cliches, you can look at\nit this way (SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER): all possible futures exist\nand people from those futures can return to their pasts. In fact,\nSeverian meets at least two time-travellers, from mutually exclusive\nfutures. They can both visit Severian's time, because their pasts\nare solid and Severian is part of their past. However, neither\ntime line is necessarily the one that Severian will experience.\n\nIn some other timeline, there was another Severian who experienced\nsimilar things to the real Severian. The various Powers who know\nwhat happens on various time lines interceded at various points in\nSeverian's life to put him back on the pattern of events experienced\nby the first Severian...until things flew too far apart for them to\nbe held together. The first Severian went along his own time line\nand became Autarch, just as the narrating Severian did; remember that\nthe first Severian experienced most of what the narrator did. The\nfirst Severian later became a time traveller and went back into his\nown past. This was also \"our\" Severian's past, so some of the things\nthat the first Severian did eventually affected \"our\" Severian.\n\nNaturally, there are contradictions inherent in this view of time\ntravel, but every version of time travel has apparent contradictions,\nand no one would ever accuse the Book of the New Sun of being \"hard\"\nscience fiction.\n\nSo there...a few answers to puzzling questions. They're there if\nyou're inclined to search for them.\n\n\t\t\tJim Gardner, University of Waterloo" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1808@hammer.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Pat Clancy", "address": "patcl at hammer.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-12T07:08:39+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<651@edison.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Insert rasberry here...\nI read Shadow of the Torturer and thought it was horrible." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll second that! This was an outstandingly bad novel.\nYet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must\nissue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such\na large and uncritical market for so much bad SF." } ] }, { "message_id": "<662@rti-sel.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "wfi", "address": "wfi at rti-sel.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-13T18:37:29+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1808@hammer.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <1808 at hammer.UUCP> patcl at hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll second that! This was an outstandingly bad novel.\nYet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must\nissue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such\na large and uncritical market for so much bad SF." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Horses__t. The \"Wulf\" cultists are simply people who appreciate a\nparticular work and are attempting to share their reasons for\nappreciating it with the other readers of this group. What the h_ll\nELSE is this group supposed to be about???\n\nIf you DON'T like a discussion, use your 'N' key to skip over the \narticles pertaining to the discussion. I personally don't give a\nhoot about the interminable Star Drek/Star Bores discussions, so I\nskip over them. I certainly don't enter a discussion I have no obvious\ninterest in to tell the people involved they're \"uncritical\" or\n\"cultists\" for caring about a topic.\n\nIf you think the Book of the New Sun was an \"outstandingly bad novel\"\nor think the comments that have been made praising it are incorrect,\nplease defend your position. You are claiming here that those of us\nwho admire Wolfe's achievement are uncritical cultists (your words). I\ncan turn around and say that those who dismiss Wolfe are insensitive\nclot-brains. WHAT THE H_LL DOES THIS KIND OF PERSONAL ATTACK PROVE?\n\nNet.sf-lovers SHOULD represent a diversity of opinion and present its\nreaders with viewpoints and opinions. That's why I read net.sf-lovers:\nto learn why people like/dislike the books I read, and maybe to learn\nabout books I'm not familiar with. I DON'T read net.sf-lovers to hear\nname-calling and ten-word informationless dismissals of works many\npeople feel have extended the genre. If you can't say something with a\nmeasurable information content, don't say anything at all.\n\n -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly" } ] }, { "message_id": "<527@hoptoad.uucp>", "from": { "name": "Tim Maroney", "address": "tim at hoptoad.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-14T18:33:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1808@hammer.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <1808 at hammer.UUCP> patcl at hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Insert rasberry here...\nI read Shadow of the Torturer and thought it was horrible." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll second that! This was an outstandingly bad novel.\nYet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must\nissue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such\na large and uncritical market for so much bad SF." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This \"cult\" happens to include more than half of the SFWA, the Science\nFiction Writers of America, as evidenced by the Nebula selections. I would\nhardly call the SFWA uncritical, or large for that matter. Perhaps the\nwriters know something you don't? (There, we're even insult for insult.)\n\nTim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1354@wucec2.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "ph", "address": "ph at wucec2.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-15T16:29:39+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<1808@hammer.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <1808 at hammer.UUCP> patcl at hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I read Shadow of the Torturer and thought it was horrible." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll second that! This was an outstandingly bad novel.\nYet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must\nissue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such\na large and uncritical market for so much bad SF." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\t Oh, for [insert favorite messiah here]'s sake! A little\n\ttolerance, PLEASE?!? Whatever your opinion of WOlfE's work (or\n\tanyone else's for that matter), it's not that difficult (or\n\tdoesn't have to be) to understand and admit that someone else's\n\tmay well be different. I like THE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN. I fully\n\trealize that the reasons for which I like it may not apply to\n\tyou. If they don't, I may question you about it, and ask you to\n\texplain your position, but I will do my damnedest NOT to abuse\n\tyou about it. Can you do me the same courtesy?\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t--pH\n/*\n *\t \"And what if I attempt to convince you otherwise?\"\n *\t \"You cannot convince us of anything, Socrates, if we refuse\n *\tto listen.\"\n */" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6921@duke.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Charlie Martin", "address": "crm at duke.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-17T05:20:24+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<527@hoptoad.uucp>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <527 at hoptoad.uucp> tim at hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This \"cult\" happens to include more than half of the SFWA, the Science\nFiction Writers of America, as evidenced by the Nebula selections. I would\nhardly call the SFWA uncritical, or large for that matter. Perhaps the\nwriters know something you don't? (There, we're even insult for insult.)\n\nTim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot\n{sun,ptsfa,ihnp4,well,yomama,frog}!hoptoad!tim" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And also even, fallacy for fallacy. This one is called \"appeal\nto authority.\"\n\n--- and how are you liking the bay area?" } ] }, { "message_id": "<11932@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "from": { "name": "Ben Lotto", "address": "lotto at brahms.berkeley.edu" }, "date": "1986-02-20T01:35:34+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<527@hoptoad.uucp>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I shot Gene Wolfe yesterday.\n\n-Ben" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6949@duke.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Charlie Martin", "address": "crm at duke.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-21T15:57:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<11932@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article <11932 at ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> lotto at brahms.UUCP (Ben Lotto) writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I shot Gene Wolfe yesterday.\n\n-Ben" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "But WITH WHAT? You've gotta be more specific!" } ] }, { "message_id": "<12016@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>", "from": { "name": "Ben Lotto", "address": "lotto at brahms.berkeley.edu" }, "date": "1986-02-24T19:24:26+00:00", "subject": "Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<3840005@csd2.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I shot Gene Wolfe yesterday.\n\n-Ben" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But WITH WHAT? You've gotta be more specific!\n\n\t\tCharlie Martin\n\t\t(...mcnc!duke!crm)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I wadded up a printout of all the articles that have been posted calling\nhim the greatest thing since Willie Mays and the Spawn of the Devil, and\nthen I catapulted it on top of him." } ] }, { "message_id": "<196@starfire.UUCP>", "from": { "name": "Steven K. Zoltan Brust", "address": "brust at starfire.uucp" }, "date": "1986-02-27T20:56:53+00:00", "subject": "Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun", "in_reply_to": "<6921@duke.UUCP>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "*** You are not able to teleport at will ***\n\nOkay, I'm finally moved to take up this gauntlet. Whatever else has\nhappened, the original query (\"What d'you guys see in this,\nanyway?\") was quite reasonable and deserves to be answered.\n\nIt is sad that I can't answer it.\n\nI will, however, describe my experience with the books. Okay.\nI picked up SHADOW OF THE TORTURER and read about a third of it,\ndiscovered that it hadn't grabbed me, and stopped reading it. For\nthe next year, I kept hearing from friends I respected how much\nthey were enjoying the books. In particular, I was hearing from\nthose who enjoyed the sounds of words, that is, the work of those\nwho are aware of the beauty of the language.\n\nWell, okay, I like that stuff, too. That's why I'm a Zelazny nut,\nand why I like Orson Scott Card, Jane Yolen, Patricia McKillip, etc. etc.\n\nSo I decided to give the books another try, this time forcing myself\nto read slowly and carefully. It worked for me, and I am now very\nglad that I did. For those who enjoy the sound of English well\nwrought, these books will tickle that. For those who enjoy a good\nstory, it really is here, it just takes a while to realize it. The\nbook is screamingly funny, without ever falling out of its\nconceit (including a multi-page comparison of the art of torturing\nto the art of writing; I almost hurt myself laughing.) The book\nhad me close to tears at times, yet was never a tragady. The part\nof me that likes to play with ideas just as ideas was tickled all\nthe way through, but never quite in ways I expected. On my next\nfew readings, when I start looking for \"What is really going on\nhere; what is the author saying?\" there is enough meat that\nI don't go away hungry.\n\nOkay? This certainly won't convince anyone who didn't like it\nthat he ought to, but maybe this will help whoever asked the initial\nquestion to understand why some of us enjoy the books.\n\nskzb" } ] } ] }