The Sorcerer's House Questions (Major Spoilers)

Thomas Bitterman · 18 Apr 2010, 22:05 · 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: tom at bitterman.net (Thomas Bitterman)
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:05:27 -0400
Subject: (urth) The Sorcerer's House Questions (*Major Spoilers*)
In-Reply-To: <j2ze8e9702e1004171642m8de556a0lb8965f5ecbd02f83 at mail.gmail.com>
References: <p2oe11bddb61003301936xa2f0970en2c959bd358e2a128 at mail.gmail.com>
	<4BB2CC14.9020208 at gmail.com>
	<483783.96122.qm at web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<j2ze8e9702e1004171642m8de556a0lb8965f5ecbd02f83 at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <j2oe11bddb61004181505zaa135084x15f02f0495077630 at mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 7:42 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

> >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?
>
> I just think the story is lame if the whole thing is a fabrication of
> Bax's, because --after all-- it already IS a fabrication by Wolfe. It
> would be like saying everything in the Latro novels was a product of
> Latro's deranged state due to his wound.


I don't know that anyone believes that everything Severian says is truthful,
yet the New Sun series is not adjudged "lame".


> It makes trying to understand
> the "contrived" story to be moot, because any inconsistencies can be
> marked up to shoddy story-telling.


The inconsistencies are the clues that Bax is making it up.  He's a
second-rate fraudster spinning a tall tale on the fly.  Of course he's
making mistakes.


> We're already facing the problems
> of possible plot-holes anyway. If we treat the story as a work by Bax
> instead of Wolfe, what is the value of that?


Either Bax is a bad writer, Wolfe is, or we're bad readers.  At some point
in the interpretation of the work, in order to smooth out inconsistencies
and patch holes, it is very easy to start writing fan fiction instead of
interpreting.  This is the worst of two worlds - bad readers covering up for
a bad writer.  If the mistakes are Bax's, instead, then Wolfe has pulled off
a Borgesian feat - a wizard who has created a fictional world but left
little inconsistencies in it so we can find our way back out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20100418/7c12adba/attachment.htm>

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