The Distant Suns of Gene Wolfe

Matthew King · 29 May 2007, 16:08 · from 2007-May.txt.gz

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: automatthew at gmail.com (Matthew King)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 11:08:04 -0500
Subject: (urth) The Distant Suns of Gene Wolfe
In-Reply-To: <d716a1c40705290826i6e0dddeay6091daedc16ab7f7 at mail.gmail.com>
References: <A133482C-B105-40C4-A6C4-4C72AD8354DC at gmail.com>
	<200705290726.29493.ddjones at riddlemaster.org>
	<d716a1c40705290826i6e0dddeay6091daedc16ab7f7 at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <73EA1E24-81D2-486F-9BDD-D78FADE0F340 at gmail.com>


On May 29, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Michael Straight wrote:

> Over and over I read articles like this and I feel like the reviewers
> aren't reading the same books I'm reading.
>
> It almost makes me doubt my ability to read.  I'm I deluded?  Or is
> this guy pretty much completely missing--I won't say "the point"
> because I don't think there's a single point to any of Wolfe's
> books--missing what's valuable and worthwhile about the books he
> mentions?

These reviewers aren't equipped to read fiction in the way that we  
read Wolfe.  I wasn't so equipped when I began, and I'm still far too  
impatient to be much good at it.

Why do such readers enjoy paddling about with Wolfe, only vaguely  
aware, if at all, of the vasty deep below?

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