The Sorcerer's House Questions (Major Spoilers)

brunians at brunians.org · 17 Apr 2010, 15:28 · from 2010-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: brunians at brunians.org (brunians at brunians.org)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 11:28:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: (urth) The Sorcerer's House Questions (*Major Spoilers*)
In-Reply-To: <483783.96122.qm at web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <p2oe11bddb61003301936xa2f0970en2c959bd358e2a128 at mail.gmail.com>
	<4BB2CC14.9020208 at gmail.com>
	<483783.96122.qm at web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <11462.72.171.0.142.1271518124.squirrel at brunians.org>

I get the impression that the faery stuff is all real.

.

> Dave Tallman wrote:
>
>
>>>>
>
>>>>Why the complete rejection of the fantastic, anyway. You wouldn't read
>>>> "Pirate Freedom" with the attitude: "Time
>>>>travel is impossible, so whatever the narrator says about going to the
>>>> past must be lies."  This is a Wolfe story,
>>>>and he often writes of the fantastic. So why not accept it?
>>>>
>
> Just on this point, and, although I'm not yet totally convinced that TSH
> is actually just a big con, I think there are a number of reasons why it
> would fit perfectly with Wolfe's attitude towards the fantastic.
>
>>From early on, Wolfe has recognized the two sides of the fantastic, both
>> the actual pure wonder of it AND the potential for deception, both in
>> worlds where it's real and worlds where it's all fabrication. The entire
>> puzzle/mystery form of his writing is constantly playing with the idea
>> that everything could have some other explanation. Sometimes the
>> explanation is magical, often when we or characters expect our own
>> "realistic" assumptions to be obvious and certain. But, at the same time,
>> his magical characters are, even when "really" magical, also often full
>> of illusion and deception: is the Claw *really* a magical trinket, or is
>> it Severian's higher nature that does the "magic," for example?
>
> I mean, there are other examples, of course, but thematically, it seems to
> fit perfectly well with Wolfe's attitude toward the fantastic and the way
> it calls on us decide what is true or false, which is something his
> characters are always having to face (Silk and the Outsider, Able and his
> role in the world, Horn and his identity/duty, etc.). So maybe the
> question with Bax is whether or not his ability to tell a wonderful,
> compelling, puzzling story (which is, of course, also Wolfe's talent) is
> innocent or dangerous? From that angle, it seems like one of the "big
> issues" with TSH is the relationship between fantasy and dishonesty. That
> seems like a perfectly appropriate theme for a writer who has always
> maintained that fantasy is one of the best ways to deal with the "really
> real" -- why shouldn't he write a story that explicitly explores the other
> side of that coin?
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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