{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/usenet/59", "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": 59, "subject": "The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "messages": 46, "voices": 25, "first": "2004-02-28T23:43:02+00:00", "last": "2004-03-07T21:21:34+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh", "address": "if.you.want.to.email at visit.joshbrain.tripod.org" }, "date": "2004-02-28T23:43:02+00:00", "subject": "The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've read a lot of Gene Wolf (the complete Sun and Urth sequences plus a \nshort story collection who's title currently escapes me), generally with \ngreat interest, the two Latros novels being a notable exception (I only \nskimmed the second). Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author.\n\nI feel that his approach has been misconstrued by the SF community at \nlarge as being profound and insightful, rather than the empty display of \nerudition that it is. The appeal of his work is to the readers own sense \nof hubris - at least it was in my case. The comments I've read here don't \ncontradict that.\n\nOf course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well, \nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification for \nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a good \nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview). The plot, etc was \nlayed on as thin veneer with elements sprinkled from Wolfe's \nextraordinarily broad knowledge of literature and myth, and mined with \nsubtle puzzles that amused Wolfe. Taken on it's face, this series is \nmuddied, conflicted, and unbelievable. Severian himself is never fleshed \nout.\n\nThe elitism is not justified. All three first person narratives I've read \nfrom Wolfe have used the same voice - precise, subtly flawed, infinitely \npatient, and maddeningly loquacious. Severian, Silk, Latros are the same \nperson to me. Urth, the Ship + Green + Blue, the mediterannean of \nantiquity are all the same places (well, Green was a bit different). So \nat least when it comes to \"range\" Wolfe does not have anything to brag \nabout.\n\nThe implicit question in any post is, why am I posting? In this case its \nmainly to share my thoughts, perhaps finding resonance with others, and \nalso to give anyone who's willing a chance to tell me I'm wrong. I kind \nof want to be wrong, as I've invested a lot of time (and money) on Wolfe \nand I would prefer not to think that it was all essentially misspent \nvanity." } ] }, { "message_id": "<878yim1xu7.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>", "from": { "name": "Miles Bader", "address": "miles at gnu.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T01:25:04+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Josh writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "also to give anyone who's willing a chance to tell me I'm wrong." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ok: You're wrong.\n\n[Also, I suppose, a troll, but whatever.]\n\n-Miles" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "`Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "SpaceGirl", "address": "nospacespamgirl at subhuman.net" }, "date": "2004-02-29T02:08:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<878yim1xu7.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Miles Bader\" wrote in message\nnews:878yim1xu7.fsf at tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Josh writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this\nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "also to give anyone who's willing a chance to tell me I'm wrong." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ok: You're wrong.\n\n[Also, I suppose, a troll, but whatever.]\n\n-Miles\n-- \n`Life is a boundless sea of bitterness'" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You have to admit, a fairly eloquent troll, if that is indeed what that post\nwas :)\n\nI've not read any Wolfe, so can't comment beyond that!" } ] }, { "message_id": "<394d822b.0402282312.243c02d0@posting.google.com>", "from": { "name": "Matt Hughes", "address": "mhughes at mars.ark.com" }, "date": "2004-02-29T07:12:49+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Josh wrote in message news:...\n\n[a lot of contentious and pretentious twaddle]\n\nDid you really write this or did you get some snooty, elitist, English\nmajoring friend to draft it for you?\n\nGene Wolfe is one of the finest writers sf has produced. That's that.\nTroll off.\n\nMatt Hughes\nhttp://mars.ark.com/~mhughes/\n\nCurrent story: Mastermindless (F&SF, March)\nNext story: A Little Learning (F&SF, June)\nNext novel: Black Brillion (Tor, November)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lawrence Person", "address": "lawrence at io.com" }, "date": "2004-02-29T07:24:15+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Josh wrote:\nTherefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author.\n\nI feel that his approach has been misconstrued by the SF community at \nlarge as being profound and insightful, rather than the empty display of \nerudition that it is." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "For the moment, just for the sake of arguement, let's pretend you're not a troll.\n\nYou are, however, part of a long line of posters to RAFSW (get thee to Google \nfor details) who make the same fundamental categorical error about Gene Wolfe: \n\"I don't understand his work, therefore his work isn't capable of being \nunderstood, therefore he's a fraud/pretentious/snooty/whatever.\"\n\nInstead of presenting carefully constructed logical arguements as to why your \nsubjective impression is mistaken (truly a fool's task anywhere, but especially \non Usenet), I'll try another tact.\n\nOf all the people making the \"I don't understand Wolfe so he's not any good\" \narguement, there seems to be a constant: none were professional writers (and \ncertainly not professional SF writers). I am wagering that this obeservation \napplies to you well.\n\nAnd the reason none of them was professional writers is that it is obvious none \nrealized just how hard the effects Wolfe achieves are to carry off, and just how \neffortlessly he does so. I am. I do. And you're wrong.\n\nHowever, rather than depending on my thus far fairly minor reputation as an SF \nwriter (I often observe that I'm the 10th most famous SF writer in Austin, \nTexas), let's take a look at a short list of far more luminous scribblers who \nthink Wolfe is a genius:\n\nNeil Gaiman\nRoger Zelazny\nUrsula K. Le Guin\nTheodore Sturgeon\nDamon Knight\nJames Tiptree, Jr.\nGreg Bear\nLucius Shepard\nMichael Swanwick\nJames P. Blaylock\nPatrick O'Leary\nGeorge R. R. Martin\nThomas M. Disch\nMichael Bishop\nKim Stanley Robinson\nJonathon Carroll\nBrain Stableford\nOrson Scott Card\nAlgis Budrys\nIan Watson\n\nNow, that's a pretty impressive and diverse list, united only in their fame in \nthe field, and their belief in Wolfe's brilliance. And that's just a quick scan \nthrough the cover blurbs on his books and a few other printed sources; if you \ndid a comprehensive survey of SFWA, it would no doubt be easy to compile a list \n10 (if not 50) times as long. Are we to believe that \"snooty\" Wolfe has pulled \nthe wool over ALL their eyes? Or that all of the above are \"elitists?\"\n\nIt's as if you said that J. S. Bach was \"boring,\" and Mozart, Beethoven, Mahler, \nStrauss, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Copeland, Bernstein, Sodheim, Glass, Jimi \nHendrix, Elvis Presley, Paul McCartney, Peter Gabriel, and Louis Armstrong all \nsaid you were wrong. We can believe you, or we can believe the dozen experts in \nthe field who say you're wrong.\n\nOccum's Razor suggests that you're full of it." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "jere7my tho?rpe", "address": "j7y at liws.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T07:59:55+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Josh wrote:\nI've read a lot of Gene Wolf (the complete Sun and Urth sequences plus a \nshort story collection who's title currently escapes me), generally with \ngreat interest, the two Latros novels being a notable exception (I only \nskimmed the second). Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " I would have a hard time thinking of an author who is more \ndown-to-earth, kind, and straightforward than Gene Wolfe. He's a Texas \ngentleman, with all that that implies.\n\n He certainly doesn't see his work as elitist; he writes that way \nbecause that's the way he writes. My personal theory is that he cut his \nteeth on mysteries, in which readers are meant to piece together \nscattered and well-hidden clues to determine the identity of the \nmurderer, and simply applies the same technique to SFnal worldbuilding. \nRather than telling you flat-out that Severian's companion is a robot, \nhe offers clues which you are meant to piece together. He expects that \nthis will be fun and rewarding for you, as it is for fans of mysteries." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well, \nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification for \nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a good \nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Inspiration != justification. Stephen R. Donaldson said he got the \ninspiration for the most powerful scene in _The Power That Preserves_ \nfrom a can of Lysol in a gas station restroom." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian, Silk, Latros are the same \nperson to me. Urth, the Ship + Green + Blue, the mediterannean of \nantiquity are all the same places (well, Green was a bit different). So \nat least when it comes to \"range\" Wolfe does not have anything to brag \nabout." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Perhaps you should read _Peace_. Perhaps, also, you should \nconsider that Severian and Silk have similar narrative voices because \n(Wolfe believes) everyone sees their own actions as reasonable and \nproper, and we're witnessing the events from inside their heads. If you \nsee past the unreliability of their narration, you'll see that they are \nvery different people.\n\n ----j7y" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "**************************************************************************\njere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 \"There is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There\n >>> j7y at liws.org <<< is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There is no \ninvert liws to reply via email spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" -- The Tick vs. Neo" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4041a227$0$5871$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>", "from": { "name": "Mike Williams", "address": "mike@nospam4me" }, "date": "2004-02-29T08:26:13+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe [Spoilers in above post]", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ouch!" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh", "address": "if.you.want.to.email at visit.joshbrain.tripod.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T09:41:15+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In article ,\n Josh wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author.\n\nI feel that his approach has been misconstrued by the SF community at\nlarge as being profound and insightful, rather than the empty display\nof erudition that it is." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "For the moment, just for the sake of arguement, let's pretend you're\nnot a troll. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks, I appreciate that. I don't think I am, but that's a matter of \nopinion, in the end." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You are, however, part of a long line of posters to RAFSW (get thee to\nGoogle for details) who make the same fundamental categorical error\nabout Gene Wolfe: \"I don't understand his work, therefore his work\nisn't capable of being understood, therefore he's a\nfraud/pretentious/snooty/whatever.\" " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Um, no. If you read my post you will see that I do, in fact, understand \nhim (or at least, think I understand him) and his appeal to me. The fact \nis that his appeal to me (and to you, apparently) rests in the quality of \ndifficulty that you brandish so proudly here.\n\nThats the thing that perhaps wasn't clear enough in my first post: I \nreally *liked* Wolfe because of his opacity. I *liked* the fact that his \nstories weren't blatantly obvious and the payoff not immediate. I *liked* \nthe fact that I knew that the majority of readers wouldn't get half the \nstuff. I *liked* the feeling of self-importance when someone saw me \nreading Wolfe.\n\nIndeed, for the very reason you mention, Wolfe is snooty! (Or at least, \nhis work is. Apparently he's a very nice man, which I find very easy to \nbelieve. But when I say he's snooty, I mean his work. Perhaps I should \nhave titled this thread \"The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's Work\".)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Instead of presenting carefully constructed logical arguements as to\nwhy your subjective impression is mistaken (truly a fool's task\nanywhere, but especially on Usenet), I'll try another tact." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, I suppose I should have stuck with my objective impressions, but \nsubjective will have to do. But that goes for you, too, I'm afraid!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of all the people making the \"I don't understand Wolfe so he's not any\ngood\" arguement, there seems to be a constant: none were professional\nwriters (and certainly not professional SF writers). I am wagering\nthat this obeservation applies to you well." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, first off I'm not making that assertion. See above. Second off, \nthat's even *more* grist for my mill, so to speak. I mean, the \n*definition* of elitist work is that it can only be enjoyed by a few \nelite...those with special knowledge, abilities, etc. Professional SF \nwriters, for instance." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And the reason none of them was professional writers is that it is\nobvious none realized just how hard the effects Wolfe achieves are to\ncarry off, and just how effortlessly he does so. I am. I do. And\nyou're wrong. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You are? You do? I am? How interesting!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "However, rather than depending on my thus far fairly minor reputation\nas an SF writer (I often observe that I'm the 10th most famous SF\nwriter in Austin, Texas), let's take a look at a short list of far\nmore luminous scribblers who think Wolfe is a genius:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Never said anything about his intelligence, nor even his ability as a \nwriter. I'm firmly in the \"snooty\" camp. The only shot I fired across the \nbow of his ability was a percieved lack of variety in character and \nsetting." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Neil Gaiman\nRoger Zelazny\nUrsula K. Le Guin\nTheodore Sturgeon\nDamon Knight\nJames Tiptree, Jr.\nGreg Bear\nLucius Shepard\nMichael Swanwick\nJames P. Blaylock\nPatrick O'Leary\nGeorge R. R. Martin\nThomas M. Disch\nMichael Bishop\nKim Stanley Robinson\nJonathon Carroll\nBrain Stableford\nOrson Scott Card\nAlgis Budrys\nIan Watson" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oh, and by the way, argument from authority *is* a fallacy, after all." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Now, that's a pretty impressive and diverse list, united only in their\nfame in the field, and their belief in Wolfe's brilliance. And that's\njust a quick scan through the cover blurbs on his books and a few\nother printed sources; if you did a comprehensive survey of SFWA, it\nwould no doubt be easy to compile a list 10 (if not 50) times as long.\nAre we to believe that \"snooty\" Wolfe has pulled the wool over ALL\ntheir eyes? Or that all of the above are \"elitists?\" " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Forgive me for observing that you appear to be suffering from a strong \ndose of hero worship. Indeed, it blinds you from my central premise:\n\nWhen Wolfe appeals, he appeals to our hubris.\n\nLet me say that again:\n\nWhen Wolfe appeals, he appeals to our hubris.\n\nPerhaps I was wrong to infer that this makes him \"snooty\". Maybe I would \nbe more correct in saying that it makes his fans snooty.\n\nWhich brings me round to the original question of why I posted this at \nall: because I had an idea, I posted it in an ill-formed manner, got some \nnice juicy feedback that helped me to focus the idea further. Thanks.\n\nAnd apologies to Gene if he ever reads this: in the quest for interesting \nself-expression, I made a bad inference. I will change the subject line \nright...now!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's as if you said that J. S. Bach was \"boring,\" and Mozart,\nBeethoven, Mahler, Strauss, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Copeland, Bernstein,\nSodheim, Glass, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, Paul McCartney, Peter\nGabriel, and Louis Armstrong all said you were wrong. We can believe\nyou, or we can believe the dozen experts in the field who say you're\nwrong.\n\nOccum's Razor suggests that you're full of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "OK. But you're attacking the wrong assertion, which, I freely admit I \npoorly presented in my initial post. (I might add that even if you were \nattacking the right assertion, argument from authority *is* a fallacy, \nafter all.)\n\nCheers." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh", "address": "if.you.want.to.email at visit.joshbrain.tripod.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T09:42:40+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"SpaceGirl\" wrote in\nnews:c1rhej$1mm1dc$1 at ID-129131.news.uni-berlin.de: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You have to admit, a fairly eloquent troll, if that is indeed what\nthat post was :)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks Space Girl. Actually, I think I understand why he thought I was a \ntroll. See my response to Lawrence Person (SF author extradenaire who was \nso kind as to participate in this thread) for a clarification of what I'm \nasserting." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh", "address": "if.you.want.to.email at visit.joshbrain.tripod.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T09:49:02+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"jere7my tho?rpe\" wrote in\nnews:j7y-80EFC8.02595529022004 at visonmassif.rs.itd.umich.edu: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In article ,\n Josh wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I've read a lot of Gene Wolf (the complete Sun and Urth sequences\nplus a short story collection who's title currently escapes me),\ngenerally with great interest, the two Latros novels being a notable\nexception (I only skimmed the second). Therefore I feel somewhat\nqualified to make this observation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist\nauthor. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " I would have a hard time thinking of an author who is more \ndown-to-earth, kind, and straightforward than Gene Wolfe. He's a\nTexas gentleman, with all that that implies." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You say this with such feeling that I can't help but believe you. And it \nhighlights the fact that I made a poor inference and expressed it in a \ntoo-aggressive manner. Really, I have no idea if Wolfe is Snooty. On \nfurther reflection, I believe that his *fans* are Snooty, myself being \nbut one of many, and my primary inspiration for the sweeping indictment." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " He certainly doesn't see his work as elitist; he writes that way \nbecause that's the way he writes. My personal theory is that he cut\nhis teeth on mysteries, in which readers are meant to piece together \nscattered and well-hidden clues to determine the identity of the \nmurderer, and simply applies the same technique to SFnal\nworldbuilding. Rather than telling you flat-out that Severian's\ncompanion is a robot, he offers clues which you are meant to piece\ntogether. He expects that this will be fun and rewarding for you, as\nit is for fans of mysteries. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well, \nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification\nfor Severian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would\nmake a good halloween costume (this was revealed in an interview)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Inspiration != justification. Stephen R. Donaldson said he got\n the \ninspiration for the most powerful scene in _The Power That Preserves_ \nfrom a can of Lysol in a gas station restroom." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not to mention the fact that such an inspiration is hardly snooty now is \nit? (I'm starting to consider this group as an oven where half-baked \nideas can become, if not delicious, then at least palatable)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Severian, Silk, Latros are the same \nperson to me. Urth, the Ship + Green + Blue, the mediterannean of \nantiquity are all the same places (well, Green was a bit different).\nSo at least when it comes to \"range\" Wolfe does not have anything to\nbrag about." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Perhaps you should read _Peace_. Perhaps, also, you should \nconsider that Severian and Silk have similar narrative voices because \n(Wolfe believes) everyone sees their own actions as reasonable and \nproper, and we're witnessing the events from inside their heads. If\nyou see past the unreliability of their narration, you'll see that\nthey are very different people." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "How do they differ? I can list a variety of ways in which they are the \nsame, but I forgot all the details." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4041bd80$0$28871$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>", "from": { "name": "Mike Williams", "address": "mike@nospam4me" }, "date": "2004-02-29T10:22:50+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Josh\" wrote in message \nnews:Xns949E112EE9E9Aifyouwanttoemailvisi at 199.45.49.11..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Indeed, for the very reason you mention, Wolfe is snooty! (Or at least,\nhis work is. Apparently he's a very nice man, which I find very easy to\nbelieve. But when I say he's snooty, I mean his work. Perhaps I should\nhave titled this thread \"The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's Work\".)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm wondering what *you* mean by snooty\"\". I don't think anything you have \nsaid speaks to his work being aloof, haughty or exclusive. It's possible \nyou're meaning something different and you're getting a reaction to your \npersonal definition of snootiness." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "When Wolfe appeals, he appeals to our hubris." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think I'd like to hear your definition of' hubris' too." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Doug", "address": "trike at cinci.rr.com" }, "date": "2004-02-29T10:46:35+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Lawrence Person wrote ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And the reason none of them was professional writers is\nthat it is obvious none realized just how hard the effects\nWolfe achieves are to carry off, and just how \neffortlessly he does so. I am. I do. And you're wrong.\n\nIt's as if you said that J. S. Bach was \"boring,\" and Mozart,\nBeethoven, Mahler, Strauss, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Copeland,\nBernstein, Sodheim, Glass, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, Paul\nMcCartney, Peter Gabriel, and Louis Armstrong all said you\nwere wrong. We can believe you, or we can believe the dozen\nexperts in the field who say you're wrong." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm not a fan of Wolfe's. To continue your analogy -- and I do love a\ngood analogy -- Wolfe for me is like the musician Richard Thompson.\n\nI can appreciate his talent, and I get why other professionals in his\nfield hold him in such high esteem, but the work just doesn't do\nanything for me.\n\nIt's not a case of right or wrong, it's a case of taste, and we each\nrespond to different flavors in different ways.\n\nI feel the same way about Howard Waldrop, too... and he's even written\none of my all-time favorite SF stories, \"The Ugly Chickens.\"\n\nhttp://www.scifi.com/scifiction/classics/classics_archive/waldrop/waldrop1.html\n\nDoug" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Grosberg", "address": "preacher_mg at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2004-02-29T14:59:43+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Josh wrote in message news:..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I've read a lot of Gene Wolf (the complete Sun and Urth sequences plus a \nshort story collection who's title currently escapes me), generally with \ngreat interest, the two Latros novels being a notable exception (I only \nskimmed the second). Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well, \nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification for \nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a good \nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview). The plot, etc was \nlayed on as thin veneer with elements sprinkled from Wolfe's \nextraordinarily broad knowledge of literature and myth, and mined with \nsubtle puzzles that amused Wolfe. Taken on it's face, this series is \nmuddied, conflicted, and unbelievable. Severian himself is never fleshed \nout." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Funny, I could say the same thing about LOTR, a book created to\nprovide a background for a couple of artificial languages, full of\nancient obscure words and myths. Frodo is never fleshed out, the book\nis muddled (Tom Bombadil. what is he doing there? and why all the\nsongs?) and unbelievable (magic rings? giving the world's most\nimprtant artifact to a small halfling to carry? I mean, really...).\n\nMaybe Wolfe does this too intentionally. But the thing is - he\nsucceeded. I only read the Book of the New Sun so far, but I'm\ndefinately looking fot the others (I already have the Long Sun books,\nbut I'm trying to find _Urth_ first).\nEven on the most basic level of creating a good, readable yarn, TBOTNS\nworks. And of course there's so much more to it (others will be better\nthan I am at expanding on the meaning of TBOTNS). I didn't feel it was\ntoo \"literary\", although I'm sure there's a ton of stuff I'm missing,\nand I certainly didn't need to use a dictionary to read it - all the\nobscure words are MEANT to stay obscure, after all.\nAnd as for Severian, he is very well fleshed out, and very human. I\nespecially liked the fact that even as he was having great adventures,\nhis mind was always going back to the one thing on the mind of all\nteenagers: girls :-)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Josh", "address": "if.you.want.to.email at visit.joshbrain.tripod.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T17:16:31+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "<4041bd80$0$28871$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Mike Williams\" wrote in\nnews:4041bd80$0$28871$afc38c87 at news.optusnet.com.au: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"Josh\" wrote in\nmessage news:Xns949E112EE9E9Aifyouwanttoemailvisi at 199.45.49.11..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Indeed, for the very reason you mention, Wolfe is snooty! (Or at\nleast, his work is. Apparently he's a very nice man, which I find\nvery easy to believe. But when I say he's snooty, I mean his work.\nPerhaps I should have titled this thread \"The Snootiness of Gene\nWolfe's Work\".) " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm wondering what *you* mean by snooty\"\". I don't think anything you\nhave said speaks to his work being aloof, haughty or exclusive. It's\npossible you're meaning something different and you're getting a\nreaction to your personal definition of snootiness." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I meant something like http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=snooty\n\nI've already revamped my assertion, which you quoted below (so I assume \nyou've read it), so you're attacking something I've already retracted. \nJeremy Thorpe spoke eloquently for Wolfe's character and in so doing \nhelped me to realize that I had made an inference error. Namely that \nsnootiness of the fanbase implies snootiness of the artist. This is not \nalways the case!\n\nWolfe is kind of like modern day opera. The sense I get is that, although \nthere are undoubtadly those who really enjoy opera for it's artistry and \nfundamental merit, there is a larger portion of the fan base that likes \nit because it is opera, and by liking it one shows one's sophistication \nand taste. Perhaps even better examples would be people who (say they) \nlike 12 tone symphonies or reading Immanuel Kant. My guess is that 4 out \nof 5 of such people like the *idea* of enjoying such haughty \nentertainments more than the entertainments themselves. Does this mean \nShoenberg or Kant are themselves snooty? Not necessarily. Maybe they were \njust down-to-earth artists who were trying to be as straight-forward as \npossible, and were just taken up by the wrong crowd. (Or maybe not.)\n\nAnyway, I think such pretense is bad (I was going to write \"without \nmerit\" but then realized...), and I don't want to be that way. Now that \nI'm aware of it perhaps I can enjoy reading Wolfe and enjoy him all the \nmore for what he has written, rather than how he is percieved. One thing \nis certain: posting this comment has been a tremendous catharsis and I \nappreciate the feedback immensely." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "When Wolfe appeals, he appeals to our hubris." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think I'd like to hear your definition of' hubris' too." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hubris does the trick." } ] }, { "message_id": "<404275be$0$16103$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>", "from": { "name": "Mike Williams", "address": "mike@nospam4me" }, "date": "2004-02-29T23:29:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Josh\" wrote in message \nnews:Xns949E5E5FE4919ifyouwanttoemailvisi at 199.45.49.11..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"Mike Williams\" wrote in\nnews:4041bd80$0$28871$afc38c87 at news.optusnet.com.au:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"Josh\" wrote in\nmessage news:Xns949E112EE9E9Aifyouwanttoemailvisi at 199.45.49.11..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Indeed, for the very reason you mention, Wolfe is snooty! (Or at\nleast, his work is. Apparently he's a very nice man, which I find\nvery easy to believe. But when I say he's snooty, I mean his work.\nPerhaps I should have titled this thread \"The Snootiness of Gene\nWolfe's Work\".)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'm wondering what *you* mean by snooty\"\". I don't think anything you\nhave said speaks to his work being aloof, haughty or exclusive. It's\npossible you're meaning something different and you're getting a\nreaction to your personal definition of snootiness." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I meant something like http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=snooty" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I as you may have noticed used the same reference, which is why I don't \nthink you justified your assertion that Wolfe's work is \"aloof, haughty or \nexclusive\"." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I've already revamped my assertion, which you quoted below (so I assume\nyou've read it), so you're attacking something I've already retracted." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I quoted your correction that the work was snooty, and that's why I asked \nyou to justofy it in terms of the definition of snooty." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "When Wolfe appeals, he appeals to our hubris." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think I'd like to hear your definition of' hubris' too." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hubris does the trick." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yep, and with that definition I don't see any justification for the \nassertion. (ooo 3 \"-tion\"words in one sentence). It seems to me to be a very \ncurious statement." } ] }, { "message_id": "<87r7wdzc7a.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>", "from": { "name": "Miles Bader", "address": "miles at gnu.org" }, "date": "2004-02-29T23:40:41+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Josh writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You say this with such feeling that I can't help but believe you. And it \nhighlights the fact that I made a poor inference and expressed it in a \ntoo-aggressive manner. Really, I have no idea if Wolfe is Snooty. On \nfurther reflection, I believe that his *fans* are Snooty, myself being \nbut one of many, and my primary inspiration for the sweeping indictment." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well I suppose you've aptly demonstrated that point in this thread...\n\nBut the original accusation remains completely silly -- Wolfe's work is\nactually very readable whether or not you bother to figure out what\neverything `means'. His prose-style in particular is lovely without\nbeing obscure.\n\n-Miles" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "[|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that\n will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth?\n[iddt] nurg, that's the goal" } ] }, { "message_id": "<+tv*P4jeq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>", "from": { "name": "Thomas Womack", "address": "twomack at chiark.greenend.org.uk" }, "date": "2004-02-29T23:41:26+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Maybe Wolfe does this too intentionally. But the thing is - he\nsucceeded. I only read the Book of the New Sun so far, but I'm\ndefinately looking fot the others (I already have the Long Sun books,\nbut I'm trying to find _Urth_ first)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I have read BOTNS and am half-way through Urth; I'm not sure that the\nterm to describe Wolfe's style isn't \"infuriating\". Lots of it reads\nrather like the perspicacity-demonstrating scenes from Sherlock Holmes,\nbut cheating in that the reader hasn't seen sufficient of the clues\n(particularly when the clue is that an alien species sounds odd for its\nkind, it being the only exemplar of its kind we've seen).\n\nI think really I find that life is too short to read very much written\nin first-person by that unreliable a narrator. The incluing process\ndoesn't work because we only see Severian reaching conclusions, rather\nthan particularly acquiring the ability to reach the conclusions\nourselves; shortage of infodumps is as much of a problem as excess of\ninfodumps, at least for me. For me, invoking a world by a\nwell-described character's reactions to it worked much better in\nsomething like _The King's Peace_.\n\nThe book that's really impressed me recently is Dorothy Dunnett's\n\"Niccolo Rising\"; absolutely superb pacing, and a really compelling\nenvironment, quite substantially thanks to everything being told in\na well-calibrated omniscient third-person.\n\nTom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nancy Lebovitz", "address": "nancy at unix5.netaxs.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T00:11:32+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Josh wrote:\n\nThats the thing that perhaps wasn't clear enough in my first post: I \nreally *liked* Wolfe because of his opacity. I *liked* the fact that his \nstories weren't blatantly obvious and the payoff not immediate. I *liked* \nthe fact that I knew that the majority of readers wouldn't get half the \nstuff. I *liked* the feeling of self-importance when someone saw me \nreading Wolfe." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's plausible that part of Wolfe's appeal is that he engages the feeling\nof being intelligent, and even that he engages the feeling that one is\nmore intelligent than other people.\n\nIt's rather harder to prove that Wolfe doesn't offer anything else, though.\n\nI'm not a tremendous Wolfe fan, but I think there's something fine and\npulpy about duelling with poisonous hypnotic flowers, or beaches so old\nthat their sand is all specs of broken glass, or (a bit more subtly) \npeople living out their lives in a palace waiting room.`" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": " Nancy Lebovitz nancy at netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com \n Now, with bumper stickers\n\nUsing your turn signal is not \"giving information to the enemy\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Richard Horton", "address": "rrhorton at prodigy.net" }, "date": "2004-03-01T02:39:22+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<394d822b.0402291845.58775386@posting.google.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 29 Feb 2004 18:45:20 -0800, mhughes at mars.ark.com (Matt Hughes)\nwrote:\nThomas Womack wrote in message news:<+tv*P4jeq at news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The book that's really impressed me recently is Dorothy Dunnett's\n\"Niccolo Rising\"; absolutely superb pacing, and a really compelling\nenvironment, quite substantially thanks to everything being told in\na well-calibrated omniscient third-person." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "To me it's odd that you would find Wolfe's unreliable narrator\ninfuriating but you're not bothered by Dunnett's practice of having\nvitally important matters take place offstage then having the\ncharacters refer to them as if the reader ought to know what they're\ntalking about. Gradually, of course, the reader clues in. I enjoy\nthe teasing, but I've known readers who find the plot lacunae so\nannoying they refuse to read Dunnett.\n\nThe Niccolo books just get better and better, by the way. Dunnett was\nas good a historical novelist as Cecilia Holland, and that's saying\nsomething." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Indeed. \n\nFor what it's worth, I prefer Dunnett's earlier series, which is\nlinked to the Niccolo books: The Chronicles of Lymond. Beginning with\nThe Game of Kings. (Which is not to say that the Niccolo books aren't\nquite good themselves.)\n\nFabulously colourful, adventurous, complex, twisty, emotionally\nwracking -- HF doesn't get any better." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net\nHome Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton\nAlso visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.tangentonline.com)" } ] }, { "message_id": "<394d822b.0402291845.58775386@posting.google.com>", "from": { "name": "Matt Hughes", "address": "mhughes at mars.ark.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T02:45:20+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<+tv*P4jeq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thomas Womack wrote in message news:<+tv*P4jeq at news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The book that's really impressed me recently is Dorothy Dunnett's\n\"Niccolo Rising\"; absolutely superb pacing, and a really compelling\nenvironment, quite substantially thanks to everything being told in\na well-calibrated omniscient third-person." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To me it's odd that you would find Wolfe's unreliable narrator\ninfuriating but you're not bothered by Dunnett's practice of having\nvitally important matters take place offstage then having the\ncharacters refer to them as if the reader ought to know what they're\ntalking about. Gradually, of course, the reader clues in. I enjoy\nthe teasing, but I've known readers who find the plot lacunae so\nannoying they refuse to read Dunnett.\n\nThe Niccolo books just get better and better, by the way. Dunnett was\nas good a historical novelist as Cecilia Holland, and that's saying\nsomething.\n\nMatt Hughes\nhttp://mars.ark.com/~mhughes/\n\nCurrent story: Mastermindless (F&SF, March)\nNext story: A Little Learning (F&SF, June)\nNext novel: Black Brillion (Tor, November)" } ] }, { "message_id": "<7ay0c.59091$aH3.1821637@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>", "from": { "name": "Mike Ward", "address": "m at d.w" }, "date": "2004-03-01T03:33:23+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<87r7wdzc7a.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Miles Bader wrote in\nnews:87r7wdzc7a.fsf at tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Josh writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You say this with such feeling that I can't help but believe you. And\nit highlights the fact that I made a poor inference and expressed it\nin a too-aggressive manner. Really, I have no idea if Wolfe is\nSnooty. On further reflection, I believe that his *fans* are Snooty,\nmyself being but one of many, and my primary inspiration for the\nsweeping indictment. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well I suppose you've aptly demonstrated that point in this thread...\n\nBut the original accusation remains completely silly -- Wolfe's work\nis actually very readable whether or not you bother to figure out what\neverything `means'. His prose-style in particular is lovely without\nbeing obscure." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I loved Book of the New Sun even though the entire time I was reading it I \nwas thinking this ought to be terrible. I still don't know why I found it \nso good, but I did.\n\nI can barely remember Urth the the New Sun. I posted a request for someone \nto remind me what happened in it not long ago. I got my memory jogged a \nbit, but I still can't recall much about or if it was any good or not.\n\nThe Fifth Head of Cerberus was absolutely amazing. I appreciate the fact \nthe Wolfe has enough faith in his reader to assume that he can figure it \nout on his own and not have be told point black what's happened.\n\nPerhaps what comes across as snootiness to some is actually the respect \nWolfe shows his reader by his refusal to dumb down the material. \n\nMike" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Htn963", "address": "htn963 at peoplepc.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T06:10:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<+tv*P4jeq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thomas Womack wrote in message news:<+tv*P4jeq at news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Maybe Wolfe does this too intentionally. But the thing is - he\nsucceeded. I only read the Book of the New Sun so far, but I'm\ndefinately looking fot the others (I already have the Long Sun books,\nbut I'm trying to find _Urth_ first)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I have read BOTNS and am half-way through Urth; I'm not sure that the\nterm to describe Wolfe's style isn't \"infuriating\". " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " I liked BOTNS, but, yeah, that's an apt description of the effect\nhis style usually has on me." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think really I find that life is too short to read very much written\nin first-person by that unreliable a narrator." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Ditto. I haven't been tempted to read anything else by Wolfe\nafter _Urth_, an overlong, rambling, pointless (and methinks\nself-indulgent*) exercise in religious-philosophical jigsaw assembling\nwhich detracts from the vividness and panache of the previous BOTNS\nbook.\n\n*And that's how I would describe Wolfe himself -- not snooty. The OP\nis welcome to overstate his case, of course." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Ht" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "jere7my tho?rpe", "address": "j7y at liws.org" }, "date": "2004-03-01T06:10:58+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Josh wrote:\n\"jere7my tho?rpe\" wrote in\nnews:j7y-80EFC8.02595529022004 at visonmassif.rs.itd.umich.edu: " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " I would have a hard time thinking of an author who is more \ndown-to-earth, kind, and straightforward than Gene Wolfe. He's a\nTexas gentleman, with all that that implies." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You say this with such feeling that I can't help but believe you." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Well, good. :)= I say it with feeling because I've spent some \ntime with him at cons, and I like him personally; he was unfailingly \nwelcoming and kind and personable to me, when he had no real reason to \nbe. This might mean I can't be exactly objective wrt his writing, but I \nhope I can." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Perhaps, also, you should \nconsider that Severian and Silk have similar narrative voices because \n(Wolfe believes) everyone sees their own actions as reasonable and \nproper, and we're witnessing the events from inside their heads. If\nyou see past the unreliability of their narration, you'll see that\nthey are very different people." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "How do they differ? I can list a variety of ways in which they are the \nsame, but I forgot all the details." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Well, the big one is in their empathy with others. Severian has no \nempathy, except that inspired by selfish infatuation; he was raised to \nbe a torturer, and can barely perceive others' pain in any other way \nthan professionally. Silk has too much, such that he often has to \novercome his empathy to be effective.\n\n ----j7y" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "**************************************************************************\njere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 \"There is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There\n >>> j7y at liws.org <<< is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There is no \ninvert liws to reply via email spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" -- The Tick vs. Neo" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "jere7my tho?rpe", "address": "j7y at liws.org" }, "date": "2004-03-01T06:21:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Ditto. I haven't been tempted to read anything else by Wolfe\nafter _Urth_, an overlong, rambling, pointless (and methinks\nself-indulgent*) exercise in religious-philosophical jigsaw assembling\nwhich detracts from the vividness and panache of the previous BOTNS\nbook." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " _Urth_ is atypical Wolfe, in that it's all about explaining rather \nthan mystifying, and I didn't much like it; I think the _Long Sun_ and \n_Short Sun_ books are worlds better than _Urth_. And they're both more \naccessible than _New Sun_, imho.\n\n ----j7y" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "**************************************************************************\njere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 \"There is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There\n >>> j7y at liws.org <<< is no spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" \"There is no \ninvert liws to reply via email spoon.\" \"SPOON!\" -- The Tick vs. Neo" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Womack", "address": "twomack at chiark.greenend.org.uk" }, "date": "2004-03-01T08:59:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "For what it's worth, I prefer Dunnett's earlier series, which is\nlinked to the Niccolo books: The Chronicles of Lymond. Beginning with\nThe Game of Kings. (Which is not to say that the Niccolo books aren't\nquite good themselves.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I gave up on the Game of Kings after getting totally frustrated with\nwhat felt like a plethora of asides in untranslated Norman French; I'm\nplanning to try again after finishing the Niccolo books. Merchants in\nBruges are for me a much more appealing setting than feuding clans in\nScotland, though (if only from titles) I'm aware that Lymond is likely\nto get out of Scotland at some point.\n\nTom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Womack", "address": "twomack at chiark.greenend.org.uk" }, "date": "2004-03-01T09:04:59+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<394d822b.0402291845.58775386@posting.google.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Thomas Womack wrote in message news:<+tv*P4jeq at news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The book that's really impressed me recently is Dorothy Dunnett's\n\"Niccolo Rising\"; absolutely superb pacing, and a really compelling\nenvironment, quite substantially thanks to everything being told in\na well-calibrated omniscient third-person." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "To me it's odd that you would find Wolfe's unreliable narrator\ninfuriating but you're not bothered by Dunnett's practice of having\nvitally important matters take place offstage then having the\ncharacters refer to them as if the reader ought to know what they're\ntalking about. Gradually, of course, the reader clues in." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I rather like that approach, in Dunnett and in GG Kay (with writers\nthat good using it, it must have something to commend itself); it\nkeeps my poor brain from atrophying, and offers an interestingly\ndifferent sort of dramatic irony. I'm much more convinced that there\nis a Big Story of which the characters we're reading know parts than I\nam from Wolfe." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The Niccolo books just get better and better, by the way. Dunnett was\nas good a historical novelist as Cecilia Holland, and that's saying\nsomething." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm looking forward to the next ones, as soon as the library's\ncatalogue server comes back on-line and I can actually order them ...\n_Niccolo Rising_ I proselytised enthusiastically about, and lent out\nto a friend the day I'd finished it.\n\nWho's Cecilia Holland? Georgette Heyer's real name, or some other\nwriter I've not yet had the privilege to encounter?\n\nTom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Richard Horton", "address": "rrhorton at prodigy.net" }, "date": "2004-03-01T13:03:43+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 01 Mar 2004 08:59:33 +0000 (GMT), Thomas Womack\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "For what it's worth, I prefer Dunnett's earlier series, which is\nlinked to the Niccolo books: The Chronicles of Lymond. Beginning with\nThe Game of Kings. (Which is not to say that the Niccolo books aren't\nquite good themselves.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I gave up on the Game of Kings after getting totally frustrated with\nwhat felt like a plethora of asides in untranslated Norman French;" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There are translations for all of them somewhere -- not sure if they\nare on the web. Elaine Thompson would know.\n\nI was able to enjoy the book despite not being able to read any of the\nasides. But, yeah, it's a bit offputting." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm\nplanning to try again after finishing the Niccolo books. Merchants in\nBruges are for me a much more appealing setting than feuding clans in\nScotland, though (if only from titles) I'm aware that Lymond is likely\nto get out of Scotland at some point." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And it's not really a spoiler to mention that Niccolo ends up spending\nsome considerable time in Scotland.\n\n(Dunnett, of course, was Scottish.)" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net\nHome Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton\nAlso visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.tangentonline.com)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Richard Horton", "address": "rrhorton at prodigy.net" }, "date": "2004-03-01T13:08:37+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 01 Mar 2004 09:04:59 +0000 (GMT), Thomas Womack\n wrote:\nWho's Cecilia Holland? Georgette Heyer's real name, or some other\nwriter I've not yet had the privilege to encounter?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Another wonderful historical fiction writer. I prefer Dunnett\nslightly, but many people prefer Holland. Not much like Heyer at all.\n(Though I like Heyer too. (I think Georgette Heyer was her real maiden\nname, her married name was something like Rougier.))\n\nHolland as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated.\n\nHolland's other novels include Great Maria, The Earl, The Firedrake,\nThe Bear Flag, and lots more. No series that I know of." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net\nHome Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton\nAlso visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.tangentonline.com)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ron Henry", "address": "ronhenry at blahblahblah.clarityconnectcom" }, "date": "2004-03-01T16:36:29+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Josh\" wrote in\nmessage news:Xns949D9FE6F929Difyouwanttoemailvisi at 199.45.49.11..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I've read a lot of Gene Wolf" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Um. You're so familiar with his work that you mis-spell his name in the\nfirst line of your post? Sigh.\n\nHint: let's say you're not simply a random troll-like troublemaker (I\ndon't feel like scrutinizing your post closely enough for clues to\ntell) -- be careful about obvious and egregious mis-spellings, since\nthey are the sure mark of a random jerk who is just trying to incite\npeople." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this\nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[bulk snipped]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I kind of want to be wrong," }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that's very fortunate.\n\nRon Henry" } ] }, { "message_id": "<2b6740hfnl6f4l8gcfv7lsb6aja1khnjbf@4ax.com>", "from": { "name": "Elaine Thompson", "address": "elaine at kethompson.org" }, "date": "2004-03-01T20:14:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 13:03:43 GMT, Richard Horton\n wrote:\nOn 01 Mar 2004 08:59:33 +0000 (GMT), Thomas Womack\n wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "For what it's worth, I prefer Dunnett's earlier series, which is\nlinked to the Niccolo books: The Chronicles of Lymond. Beginning with\nThe Game of Kings. (Which is not to say that the Niccolo books aren't\nquite good themselves.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I gave up on the Game of Kings after getting totally frustrated with\nwhat felt like a plethora of asides in untranslated Norman French;" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "There are translations for all of them somewhere -- not sure if they\nare on the web. Elaine Thompson would know." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not necessarily, I can't keep up with everything. But I am aware of\nNancy Wright's efforts, which are on paper - see\n\nhttp://www.dorothydunnettreadingaids.com/\n\nAnd the Dunnett Companions, of course. I think they're OOP, though,\nand Nancy's work is offered at her cost." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Elaine Thompson " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William December Starr", "address": "wdstarr at panix.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T20:47:34+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm not a tremendous Wolfe fan, but I think there's something fine\nand pulpy about duelling with poisonous hypnotic flowers, or\nbeaches so old that their sand is all specs of broken glass, or (a\nbit more subtly) people living out their lives in a palace waiting\nroom." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Huh. I thought that that last one was probably the _least_ subtle,\nmost in-your-face farcical suspension-of-disbelief breaker in the\nwhole Book of the New Sun series." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "William December Starr", "address": "wdstarr at panix.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T20:52:59+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ,\n\"jere7my tho?rpe\" said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[Gene Wolfe] certainly doesn't see his work as elitist; he writes\nthat way because that's the way he writes. My personal theory is\nthat he cut his teeth on mysteries, in which readers are meant to\npiece together scattered and well-hidden clues to determine the\nidentity of the murderer, and simply applies the same technique to\nSFnal worldbuilding. Rather than telling you flat-out that\nSeverian's companion is a robot, he offers clues which you are\nmeant to piece together. He expects that this will be fun and\nrewarding for you, as it is for fans of mysteries." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Of course, often in those mysteries there's a point near the end in\nwhich the detective gathers all the suspects together in the drawing\nroom and Explains It All for the benefit of us mere mortals who\nhaven't figured it out..." } ] }, { "message_id": "<010320041636342186%chenrich@monmouth.com>", "from": { "name": "Christopher J. Henrich", "address": "chenrich at monmouth.com" }, "date": "2004-03-01T21:35:35+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article , Josh" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " wrote:\nI've read a lot of Gene Wolf (the complete Sun and Urth sequences plus a \nshort story collection who's title currently escapes me), generally with \ngreat interest, the two Latros novels being a notable exception (I only \nskimmed the second). Therefore I feel somewhat qualified to make this \nobservation: Mr. Wolfe is a snooty elitist author." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am surprised that you have read so much of Wolfe if you really\ndislike his writing. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "[snip]\n Consider that the entire justification for \nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a good \nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview). " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe has said somewher that he has a sense of humor which makes strong\nmen faint and women reach for weapons. Maybe the interviewer got a\ntaste of it here. Four volumes is a bit much for upstaging Darth\nVader." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Chris Henrich\nThe wonderful thing about not planning, is that failure comes as a complete\nsurprise, and is not preceded by a period of worry or depression.\n -- \"Kiltannen\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0whznb0rsi9.fsf@rescomp.Stanford.EDU>", "from": { "name": "Brian Palmer", "address": "bpalmer at rescomp.stanford.edu" }, "date": "2004-03-02T00:40:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Lawrence Person writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of all the people making the \"I don't understand Wolfe so he's not any good\" \narguement, there seems to be a constant: none were professional writers (and \ncertainly not professional SF writers). I am wagering that this obeservation \napplies to you well.\n\nAnd the reason none of them was professional writers is that it is obvious none \nrealized just how hard the effects Wolfe achieves are to carry off, and just how \neffortlessly he does so. I am. I do. And you're wrong.\n\nHowever, rather than depending on my thus far fairly minor reputation as an SF \nwriter (I often observe that I'm the 10th most famous SF writer in Austin, \nTexas), let's take a look at a short list of far more luminous scribblers who \nthink Wolfe is a genius:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Without speaking more about the merits of the original poster's case,\nI just have to say this is a very silly argument by authority. In some\ncases, argument by authority is valid; but whether an author is snooty\nor not, or has a broad range, I don't think so.\n\nIt's even sillier when that authority is also based on on cover\nblurbs, given the general accuracy and relevance of such blurbs," }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ryan Klippenstine", "address": "ryank at cogeco.ca" }, "date": "2004-03-02T02:38:55+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe's fans", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 1 Mar 2004 15:47:34 -0500, wdstarr at panix.com (William December\nStarr) wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'm not a tremendous Wolfe fan, but I think there's something fine\nand pulpy about duelling with poisonous hypnotic flowers, or\nbeaches so old that their sand is all specs of broken glass, or (a\nbit more subtly) people living out their lives in a palace waiting\nroom." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Huh. I thought that that last one was probably the _least_ subtle,\nmost in-your-face farcical suspension-of-disbelief breaker in the\nwhole Book of the New Sun series." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oh, come now, there's no way that's worse than the Ascian \"language.\"\nAnd as for subtle, how about Typhon and Piaton? I wonder what *that*\ncould be about?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Ryan Klippenstine" } ] }, { "message_id": "<404405d0$0$28274$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>", "from": { "name": "David Kennedy", "address": "dave at dkennedy.org" }, "date": "2004-03-02T03:56:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Richard Horton wrote:\n[Cecelia] Holland [h]as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's still in print as I bought the bright yellow Gollancz edition\njust over a year ago. I bounced off it hard. I gave it another\nmonth or so, then had another go before deciding that while\nmany people like this novel, I'm not one of them." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "David Kennedy\nwww.dkennedy.org" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6ZT0c.20551$aH.16733@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>", "from": { "name": "Richard Horton", "address": "rrhorton at prodigy.net" }, "date": "2004-03-02T04:21:22+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<404405d0$0$28274$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 02 Mar 2004 03:56:00 GMT, David Kennedy wrote:\nRichard Horton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "[Cecelia] Holland [h]as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's still in print as I bought the bright yellow Gollancz edition\njust over a year ago. I bounced off it hard. I gave it another\nmonth or so, then had another go before deciding that while\nmany people like this novel, I'm not one of them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I will say that I read it back then, when I was 16 or so, and not\nsince. A couple of years later, my then girlfriend, also an SF fan*,\nremarked only slightly caustically that much of my enjoyment probably\nstemmed from a certain scene towards the middle. (The main character\nhas been made a concubine of one of the heavy planet rulers. (I can't\nremember which planet.) She takes the opportunity to initiate another\nconcubine into, well, the pleasures available to the concubines who\naren't currently in their master's bed.)\n\n*(This woman was a bookstore manager. She used her authority to keep\ncopies of Gene Wolfe's _The Fifth Head of Cerberus_ on the shelves of\nher bookstore, which happened to be quite close to Barrington, IL,\nwell past the date when it should have been stripped. One day she\nnoticed a middle aged man browsing the book, with, as she put it,\ngreat emotion -- tears even. The man was Gene Wolfe.)\n\n " }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net\nHome Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton\nAlso visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.tangentonline.com)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Htn963", "address": "htn963 at peoplepc.com" }, "date": "2004-03-02T10:56:18+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<6ZT0c.20551$aH.16733@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Richard Horton wrote in message news:<6ZT0c.20551$aH.16733 at newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 02 Mar 2004 03:56:00 GMT, David Kennedy wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Richard Horton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "[Cecelia] Holland [h]as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's still in print as I bought the bright yellow Gollancz edition\njust over a year ago. I bounced off it hard. I gave it another\nmonth or so, then had another go before deciding that while\nmany people like this novel, I'm not one of them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Hmm, coincidentally, I just got a copy today on a whim from a\nclearance rack outside my local Half bookstore, never having heard of\nit. (And this happened to be the first newsgroup thread I read after\ngetting home from the bookstore.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I will say that I read it back then, when I was 16 or so, and not\nsince. A couple of years later, my then girlfriend, also an SF fan*,\nremarked only slightly caustically that much of my enjoyment probably\nstemmed from a certain scene towards the middle. (The main character\nhas been made a concubine of one of the heavy planet rulers. (I can't\nremember which planet.) She takes the opportunity to initiate another\nconcubine into, well, the pleasures available to the concubines who\naren't currently in their master's bed.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " It'll probably take a bit more than just sex in heavy g's to get\nme to enthusiastically crack this big sucker open. [Notice all the\ndouble entendres] But at least the author being a predominantly\nhistorical novelist sounds interesting." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "*(This woman was a bookstore manager. She used her authority to keep\ncopies of Gene Wolfe's _The Fifth Head of Cerberus_ on the shelves of\nher bookstore, which happened to be quite close to Barrington, IL,\nwell past the date when it should have been stripped. One day she\nnoticed a middle aged man browsing the book, with, as she put it,\ngreat emotion -- tears even. The man was Gene Wolfe.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " This better have happened when Wolfe was just starting out or\nit'll be just maudlin rather than moving." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Ht" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Richard Horton", "address": "rrhorton at prodigy.net" }, "date": "2004-03-02T12:57:21+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 2 Mar 2004 02:56:18 -0800, Htn963 at peoplepc.com (Htn963) wrote:\n This better have happened when Wolfe was just starting out or\nit'll be just maudlin rather than moving." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It would have been in 1976 or so, before Wolfe had had much (if any)\nin the way of commercial success, though after he was established as a\nmajor writer in the SF field." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net\nHome Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton\nAlso visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.tangentonline.com)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "wthyde", "address": "wthyde at godzilla.acpub.duke.edu" }, "date": "2004-03-02T17:42:23+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<404405d0$0$28274$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "David Kennedy writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Richard Horton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "[Cecelia] Holland [h]as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's still in print as I bought the bright yellow Gollancz edition\njust over a year ago. I bounced off it hard. I gave it another\nmonth or so, then had another go before deciding that while\nmany people like this novel, I'm not one of them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " To me (way back in 1977) it seemed like an inferior\n rewrite of her novel \"Until the sun falls\", about the\n mongol empire (which I liked a great deal).\n\n I don't insist on radically hard SF, or, at all, on\n realistic battle descriptions (whatever that means),\n but I thought that with respect to the former\n she had no concept of Newton's laws, and as\n to the latter that Mongol battle plans couldn't\n work in just the same way on a three dimensional\n battlefield.\n\n I've always meant to give it another try, as I really\n like her historical novels. I may have been expecting\n too much from FW, which was highly touted when it\n was published.\n\n\n\nWilliam Hyde\nEOS Department\nDuke University" } ] }, { "message_id": "<9b2e17b4.0403021549.48d43d23@posting.google.com>", "from": { "name": "Peter Shor", "address": "peterwshor at aol.com" }, "date": "2004-03-02T23:49:04+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "wthyde at godzilla.acpub.duke.edu wrote in message news:..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Kennedy writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Richard Horton wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "[Cecelia] Holland [h]as also written one unambiguous SF novel: _Floating Worlds_,\nfrom 1975 or so, set in a future in which the Solar System is pretty\nmuch fully colonized, and Earth is something of a backwater. An Earth\nwoman gets involved in the rather gothic politics of some heavy planet\nfolks. I liked it a lot, thought it read very much like Historical\nFiction. It was nominated for a Nebula but Holland withdrew the\nnomination in favor of the paperback edition, with then did not get\nnominated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's still in print as I bought the bright yellow Gollancz edition\njust over a year ago. I bounced off it hard. I gave it another\nmonth or so, then had another go before deciding that while\nmany people like this novel, I'm not one of them." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " To me (way back in 1977) it seemed like an inferior\n rewrite of her novel \"Until the sun falls\", about the\n mongol empire (which I liked a great deal).\n\n I don't insist on radically hard SF, or, at all, on\n realistic battle descriptions (whatever that means),\n but I thought that with respect to the former\n she had no concept of Newton's laws, and as\n to the latter that Mongol battle plans couldn't\n work in just the same way on a three dimensional\n battlefield.\n\n I've always meant to give it another try, as I really\n like her historical novels. I may have been expecting\n too much from FW, which was highly touted when it\n was published.\n\n\n\nWilliam Hyde\nEOS Department\nDuke University" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "When I read it (many years ago) it seemed like a mirror image of \nGreat Maria, which is my favorite of her novels. The events are \nparallel, but the meaning is reversed. \n\nPeter Shor" } ] }, { "message_id": "<168f035a.0403021608.7dc7d1c2@posting.google.com>", "from": { "name": "G Klinedinst", "address": "g_klinedinst at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2004-03-03T00:08:25+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Josh wrote in message news:\n\n\n\nJosh,\nI am not a regular here I just happened across this and wanted to see\nif I could clarify why some people, including myself, love Gene\nWolfe(not in a Severian-Jolenta way). :-) First off with regards to\nhubris, I think you are judging a very large community on the basis of\na few individuals. Gene Wolfe is far bigger than RASFW, just as we are\nall much larger than this NG too." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well, \nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification for \nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a good \nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview). " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This was probably said half-jokingly. Many artists like to play with\ninterviewers, especially with regards to the \"cookie-cutter\" questions\nthey ask. I would take that with a grain of salt." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The plot, etc was \nlayed on as thin veneer with elements sprinkled from Wolfe's \nextraordinarily broad knowledge of literature and myth, and mined with \nsubtle puzzles that amused Wolfe. Taken on it's face, this series is \nmuddied, conflicted, and unbelievable. Severian himself is never fleshed \nout." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I disagree 100%. Everything you could ever want to know about Severian\nis shown in his actions. I think this is the core problem why you are\nhaving these conflicting feelings about his writing. When I first read\nthe _New Sun_ series I was boggled by Severian. Why doesn't he say, \"I\nwas really sad when X happened\", or \"So and so really scared me\", etc.\nI thought he had no emotions or else very little emotion, almost like\na robot, or a poorly fleshed out character, as you suggest. Upon\nfurther readings and also quite a bit of reflection I realized that\nhis actions speak louder than words ever could. He simply isn't\nintrospective. You have to put yourself in Severians place, imagine\nwhat you would feel, what you would think, etc. Gene Wolfe is the\nultimate \"show, don't tell\" author. He hints at the motives and\nfeelings of the characters but doesn't explicitly say them too often.\nPart of the fun and excitement about reading Gene Wolfe is trying to\nfigure out all of the characters motivations. I don't think when he\nwrites like this he is trying to be difficult or obtuse because he is\nsnotty, but more because he enjoys it and he knows that there are many\nfans out there that enjoy it.\n\nThat being said, Wolfe probably isn't for everyone. To continue an\nanalogy someone made earlier, I know that Bach was a genius but I\ndon't personally enjoy his music and I'm not going to try to force\nmyself to. You are perfectly reasonable to not like Wolfe. All I'm\nsaying is that there is something very wonderful there enjoyed by many\npeople.\n\n-Greg" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "wthyde", "address": "wthyde at godzilla.acpub.duke.edu" }, "date": "2004-03-03T18:49:04+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<9b2e17b4.0403021549.48d43d23@posting.google.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[re: Floating worlds]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " To me (way back in 1977) it seemed like an inferior\n rewrite of her novel \"Until the sun falls\", about the\n mongol empire (which I liked a great deal)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "When I read it (many years ago) it seemed like a mirror image of \nGreat Maria, which is my favorite of her novels. The events are \nparallel, but the meaning is reversed. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " That's one of hers I have not read. Now to find a\n copy...\n\nWilliam Hyde\nEOS Department\nDuke University" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ron Henry", "address": "ronhenry at blahblahblah.clarityconnectcom" }, "date": "2004-03-04T13:55:55+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "<168f035a.0403021608.7dc7d1c2@posting.google.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Josh wrote in\nmessage news:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well,\nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification\nfor\nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a\ngood\nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This was probably said half-jokingly. Many artists like to play with\ninterviewers, especially with regards to the \"cookie-cutter\" questions\nthey ask. I would take that with a grain of salt." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, I think Wolfe was sincere that he flashed on an image while\nthinking about costume balls at cons, and that this gave him ideas that\nled to the look of the torturers' guild -- but the real problem here is\nmisrepresentation and overstatement by the original poster. To say that\n\"the entire justification for Severian\" was an idea for a \"Halloween\ncostume\" is to grossly misrepresent Wolfe's comments. I read the\ninterview he's referring to, and it's just a case of when Wolfe got a\ngerm of an idea that, over time, evolved into a character. Long\nconsideration of that character, in turn, lead to Wolfe beginning the\nNew Sun books.\n\nTo call this the \"entire justification\" blithlely ignores Wolfe's\nobvious interest in classic sf motifs that he reworks within the series,\nhis serious conisderation of morality and good/evil dichotomies, and not\nleast the curious twisting and re-fashioning of imagery and symbology\nfrom historical Christian sources that all help propel the narrative.\n\nRon Henry" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4049d4cc$0$31907$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>", "from": { "name": "Mike Williams", "address": "mike@nospam4me" }, "date": "2004-03-06T13:40:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe ", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"jere7my tho?rpe\" wrote in message \nnews:j7y-80EFC8.02595529022004 at visonmassif.rs.itd.umich.edu..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In article ,\nJosh wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Rather than telling you flat-out that" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "< Big spoiler>" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris Thompson", "address": "cet1 at cus.cam.ac.uk" }, "date": "2004-03-07T21:21:34+00:00", "subject": "Re: The Snootiness of Gene Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In article ," }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Ron Henry wrote:\nJosh wrote in\nmessage news:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Of course, I really should offer support for this assertion. (Well,\nsudden realization anyway). Consider that the entire justification\nfor\nSeverian was that Wolfe wanted to write a character who would make a\ngood\nhalloween costume (this was revealed in an interview)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This was probably said half-jokingly. Many artists like to play with\ninterviewers, especially with regards to the \"cookie-cutter\" questions\nthey ask. I would take that with a grain of salt." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, I think Wolfe was sincere that he flashed on an image while\nthinking about costume balls at cons, and that this gave him ideas that\nled to the look of the torturers' guild -- but the real problem here is\nmisrepresentation and overstatement by the original poster. To say that\n\"the entire justification for Severian\" was an idea for a \"Halloween\ncostume\" is to grossly misrepresent Wolfe's comments. I read the\ninterview he's referring to, and it's just a case of when Wolfe got a\ngerm of an idea that, over time, evolved into a character. Long\nconsideration of that character, in turn, lead to Wolfe beginning the\nNew Sun books." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe also tells the story about the masquerade in \"Helioscope\" \n(originally written for _Empire_, but reprinted in _The Castle of \nthe Otter_). It needs to be read in context, of course. But perhaps \nthe most relevant comment is Wolfe's own (also in TCotO):\n\nGW> You've now read two quite different pieces describing the way in \nGW> which _The Book of the New Sun_ came to be written. I wasn't lying \nGW> in either---writing's a complex process, and if I wanted to I could\nGW> do a third piece giving quite different explanations. They, also,\nGW> would be true.\n\nChris Thompson\nEmail: cet1 [at] cam.ac.uk" } ] } ] }