The Sorcerer's House Questions (Major Spoilers)

Eugene Zaretskiy · 19 Apr 2010, 14:58 · 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: eugene.zar at gmail.com (Eugene Zaretskiy)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:58:23 -0400
Subject: (urth) The Sorcerer's House Questions (*Major Spoilers*)
In-Reply-To: <571520.55736.qm at web37608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <l2x1bf4dd41004181309z93dfb4afwa01f99b4ee391d80 at mail.gmail.com>
	<x2pe11bddb61004190724u25d5dda4g3c382df36f9762d8 at mail.gmail.com>
	<571520.55736.qm at web37608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <m2tdd5657f31004190758r9d0e3591pa573ccc00ab45ca2 at mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Craig Brewer <cnbrewer at yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the end, I'm not convinced that the entire thing was a total fabrication.
> But I am convinced that Wolfe means us to think that it's a possibility
> since, otherwise, I have a hard time understanding why Bax should ever have
> been a con man at all, unless it was just an easy way to get the character
> into (and then out of) jail.

This is what I think, too. Craig, earlier you said it made sense for
Wolfe to write a novel where the fantasy elements are fabrications.
Similarly, maybe his objective is more nuanced than that (Wolfe?
Nuanced? Crazy, I know) and he wants to "con" readers into believing
whatever they want about Bax's story. If there's a level to this book
where Bax is the compiler and made everything up, I don't think it's
the ONLY path to understanding the book as a whole, but I agree with
you that Bax's being a con man and other such details are placed by
Wolfe to add to this particular reading. I'm amazed that the "debate"
has gone on for so long, though; you either believe it and toss away
any hope of understanding the book as a puzzle box (this approach
being understandably labeled "lame" by some) or you don't believe it.

I get this feeling GW would be highly amused by all this. (Does he
read this list?) Can't the "Bax made it all up" theory co-exist with
the puzzle box version?

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

-- 
Eugene Z
http://blog.eugenez.net

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