A perspective on Wolfe's New sun series. (Was tiny reviews..)

Toshi Takeuchi · 20 Jan 1993, 21:36 · from sf-lovers.1993.mbox

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: tt at wag.caltech.edu (Toshi Takeuchi)
Subject: A perspective on Wolfe's New sun series. (Was tiny reviews..)
Date: 20 Jan 93 21:36:33 GMT
Message-ID: <sflovers-v18-86-12 at digest.sf-lovers>
X-Digest-Issue: SF-LOVERS Digest V18 #86
X-Urthmirror-Source: https://archive.org/details/sf-lovers-digest-vol-18a

I certainly didn't enjoy the New Sun material for its content or "point".
This series (IMO) is a wonderful literary work.  The writing carries you
along and brings you into the world of Urth.

The story is somewhat bland if not mundane.  However, Wolfe's writing makes
you believe that Severian is a real person with real concerns.

Indeed, many people will think the book is boring.  I thought the Shadow of
the Torturer was boring when I first read it.  However, I read the book too
fast.  His writing doesn't really flow unless you read it a little more
slowly.

I think the series is masterful.  In my opinion, if you read the work and
were disappointed in the story or "point" of the work, then I think you are
missing the beauty of the series.

The beauty arises from the ability to bring characters like Severian to
life and make their silly concerns and problems real problems that we can
relate to and understand...

maxson at cerl.uiuc.edu (K R Maxson) writes:
>The New Sun material is an attempt to weave a Wolfesque story into the
>tapestry of commercial fantasy and science fiction.  I think it is done
>rather slickly, but that much of the current SF market would rather bypass
>books that aren't reassuringly shallow and don't spell out the point for
>the reader by the end.  (Personally I feel that if the writer can sum up
>his or her thesis in a few sentences at the end of the book, the book
>should have only been a few sentences and save the gloss.  If a book
>doesn't make me think at least as much as walking in the woods does, I'd
>just as soon walk in the woods.)

The "gloss" is what makes the work.  It is eloquent and real.  I don't
care about the thesis of the work.  It's actually pretty trivial...

Toshi

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net