Introduction and Breath

Bart Everson · 05 May 2011, 16:52 · from 2011-May.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: b at rox.com (Bart Everson)
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 11:52:10 -0500
Subject: (urth) Introduction and Breath
In-Reply-To: <8de1bbbe3b9c672c565bdcf53977cd8a at imap.io.com>
References: <670616.28659.qm at web84103.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<8de1bbbe3b9c672c565bdcf53977cd8a at imap.io.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim_6J7PF968oTrrnUXn_LVnxXPrqQ at mail.gmail.com>

Now that this thread seems definitively dead, I just wanted to revive it
briefly and say thanks for the many thoughtful and thought-provoking
responses to my query.

It seems the question of Severian's unreliability depends on one's
definition of "unreliable."

I'm sure we all agree that Severian's narrative lends itself to deep reading
and re-reading. The ostensible surface narrative isn't the whole story.
There are depths to plumb and mysteries to explore. From that angle I see
how the "unreliable" label can be applied. But on the other hand, Severian
is not *strongly* unreliable in the sense that prevarications (or insanity)
create that layered narrative. At least I don't think so. The layers of
meaning stem from subtlety rather than active deception.

The contradictions and apparent lies that have been cataloged are quite
interesting, but they do not seem to me to suggest a deep alternate reading.
If anything, they strike me as, perhaps, an authorial joke, or, in some
cases, authorial error.

In any case, my main concern was that I was missing some huge aspect of
Severian's narrative, and you all have collectively laid my mind to rest on
that issue. I won't say that I've unraveled every riddle in these books. Far
from it. But I think I'm aware, at least, of most of the outstanding
questions. Having been through the story so many times, all Severian's
subtleties have become very familiar, like an old friend. I enjoy this
aspect of the narrative greatly.

I am currently reading the Book of the New Sun aloud to my wife, for the
second time. The first time through I refrained from editorial comment. I
did not explain beyond what was in the text. I wanted my wife to be able to
experience the richness of discovery first hand. I'm not sure if she did. In
any event, this second time though, I am taking the opposite approach and
explaining each mystery, little or big, as we encounter them ? to the best
of my ability. She doesn't get the joy of unlocking the secrets herself, but
she can appreciate Wolfe's ingenious constructions, and it doesn't reflect
too badly on me either.

Perhaps you could say I've come to rely on Severian's unreliability.

Thanks again,

Editor B
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20110505/92f67f97/attachment.htm>

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