Wolfe and Materialism

Gerry Quinn · 12 Feb 2011, 14:38 · from 2011-February.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: gerryq at indigo.ie (Gerry Quinn)
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 14:38:55 -0000
Subject: (urth) Wolfe and Materialism
References: <SNT123-W540DE54F5AB3656B255952CFEF0 at phx.gbl><3137CC340B2B44F0AD30C7E2D057E691@jill>
	<4D557249.7030703 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C3DE61399A5146BB85051540DD0EC27F@jill>


From: "James Wynn" <crushtv at gmail.com>
>> Gerry Quinn-

>> I didn't say that at all.  What I'm saying is that a 'nuts and bolts' 
>> explanation - the Ploughman's explanation, if you like - needs to be 
>> there. Occasionally an author may throw a vagary and include events which 
>> are deliberately contradictory or inexplicable - but in books written to 
>> be understood, this tends to be rare.
>
> Now, do you believe it was really possible to come to an unequivocal 
> conclusion from the four volumes of 'The Book of the New Sun' that 
> "Severian would travel through time to become both the Conciliator and Apu 
> Punchau, rather than being a reincarnation, avatar, or descendant. And 
> that the world would drown with the coming of the New Sun"? Yes, after 
> "UotNS" one can see that the clues were there. But would anyone have 
> chosen those conclusions over all the other possibilities? Would those 
> conclusions have passed the bar you have continuously set on this list 
> that "books are written to be understood" and, therefore, I must feel that 
> _I_ --with whatever background I carry to the book-- must be able to 
> understand it. I submit regarding some important points of plot in The 
> Book of the New Sun, this is self-evidently not the case.

Those are not events which are contradictory or inexplicable.  They are 
events for which it is not clear which of two possibilities is the case - a 
completely different situation.

Certainly in such cases we can use allusive hints to determine *which* 'nuts 
and bolts' explanation best fits the story.  But it does not alter the fact 
that we can never validly use them as substitutes for such explanations.  At 
least in books that can usefully be analysed, which is what I meant by 
"written to be understood".  I did not mean by it that every last detail is 
explained.

- Gerry Quinn

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