Weekly blog links

Jonathan Goodwin · 14 Apr 2009, 14:48 · from 2009-April.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: joncgoodwin at gmail.com (Jonathan Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:48:02 -0500
Subject: (urth) Weekly blog links
In-Reply-To: <BLU120-W21F755F4AEB51A703971F2867C0 at phx.gbl>
References: <cbf55b100904132040oc52841fy64f04215222e190 at mail.gmail.com>
	<20090414042801.631EA48008 at diego.dreamhost.com>
	<37bfbeb60904132218j370acb6cp2fd099e318ac7fa8 at mail.gmail.com>
	<6067.67.142.130.25.1239687152.squirrel at brunians.org>
	<37bfbeb60904132244o8478e25gbe5057996234d13e at mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU120-W21F755F4AEB51A703971F2867C0 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <37bfbeb60904140748q62ab4d0eu66783d2a1a5b46d8 at mail.gmail.com>

I mentioned Dozois and publishing because I think it shows that Wolfe
achieved success* with a certain approach exemplified best by FHC and
never seemed to abandon it fully, perhaps because of editorial and
audience expectations. What MS did Dozois reject, for example? Maybe
this is known.

*Not really commercial success, true. But I think his good critical
reputation is justified and am a booster generally, which is why I am
so bitterly disappointed in some of the recent work.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Chris P <rasputin_ at hotmail.com> wrote:
> All other things aside I don't see what "sociology of publishing" has to do
> with the quality of a particular work. The work stands or falls on its own
> merit. It seems like you are taking for granted that certain aspects of the
> work are inferior and then, when asked for a reason, attempting to explain
> how such inferior aspects managed to get published. But what's being asked
> of you is an explanation of why you judge said aspects to be inferior in the
> first place.
>
> I am not trying, in this case, to even argue with your conclusion. I just
> think your reasoning is not as clear as you think, because you're mixing up
> the possible questions that could be asked here and answering, at least in
> part, the wrong one.
>
>> I thought I did in the post, but here it is again: I think the book
>> (and several others) rely on the author's well-earned reputation for
>> subtlety to mask or adorn what are essentially undeveloped
>> pot-boilers. The time-travel aspect of Pirate Freedom illustrates this
>> nicely, I think.
>>
>> Dozois's introduction to FHC in _Modern Classics of Science Fiction_
>> (viewable via google books) might shed some additional
>> sociology-of-publishing light on this.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:32 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
>> > So why don't you like the book, Jon? I understand from your article that
>> > you don't like it: that is abundantly obvious. But I think a review of
>> > this nature would be more useful if you would include a paragraph - even
>> > half a paragraph - where you give your reasons for not liking it.
>> >
>> > Just a thought.
>> >
>> > Of course, you may just be a ouanquerre.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > .
>> >
>> >
>> >> I believe I came to that conclusion a few years ago myself.
>> >>
>> >> I recently made some disappointed comments on Pirate Freedom:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.jgoodwin.net/?p=647
>> >>
>> >> How many of you agree that the Wolfe of Fifth Head, Peace, New Sun,
>> >> Endangered Species (partially), and Death of Dr. Island and OS and OS
>> >> is not even recognizably the same author as that of Pirate Freedom, An
>> >> Evil Guest, or the Short Sun? (Shared concerns, yes. The quality of
>> >> execution, however, is more like that of a bad imitator.)
>> >>
>> >>> There are quite a few advocates (including Dave Tallman on the wiki)
>> >>> of
>> >>> the
>> >>> theory that the narrator is himself a puppet, dismissed by this
>> >>> commentator.
>> >>> I don't buy it myself either, buit it is slightly nagging...
>> >>>
>> >>> best,
>> >>>
>> >>> Mo
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> # ~ # ~ #
>> >>>
>> >>> WolfeWiki now at:
>> >>> http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Urth Mailing List
>> >>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Urth Mailing List
>> >> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Urth Mailing List
>> > To post, write urth at urth.net
>> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
> ________________________________
> Rediscover Hotmail?: Get e-mail storage that grows with you. Check it out.
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

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