Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

António Pedro Marques · 14 Dec 2011, 12:35 · from 2011-December.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: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gUGVkcm8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 12:35:33 +0000
Subject: (urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?
In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ5FAYiGdeTujWFyAX1A37Q=YDuvZbqfuiJmcNjEP5tD1A at mail.gmail.com>
References: <20111213164613.30232.qmail at server281.com>
	<CAM0v-i6AOcERnP_dUq7jZmhEBcNyMvXKH9VoGO2oGSEMdZHiTw at mail.gmail.com>
	<871FD0B988794812B029032B38091DA0@Rover>
	<CADQR0GqCOY7VyWYh=MUAmr7sv7Y2SyBMmb2bQG6YBVTR8H1ZeQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ6sFDgYVmHfXA7LjRPEDFpAz6yOEW4icGQEFORDaLOWaQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<CADQR0Go5Wc0Dd3damtEZCyphG6ntP6dz+F-QmqNdY0OsKJBu5Q at mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ6gec6H1rFT-1KpkC9nh2uz2ZUQq_mWvrrDZZbgyU4UZA at mail.gmail.com>
	<CADQR0GoLcEcnittL1k35dX8S9y9dvkhmuLrHBynB8u3REDw5Yg at mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ4SOgZ4aDtRCqYj_1kEi+84_TLK_MYEjc-ZgTd0n28jtA at mail.gmail.com>
	<4EE88878.8030609 at gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ5FAYiGdeTujWFyAX1A37Q=YDuvZbqfuiJmcNjEP5tD1A at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EE89815.3020908 at gmail.com>

Daniel Petersen wrote (14-12-2011 12:20):
> 2011/12/14 Ant?nio Pedro Marques:  I think tIoDDaOSaOS or SftOH would be
> the best places to start, because you have smaller bits to chew before
> you go into a 12 (500 pages) volume series. But the 12 (500 pages) volume
> series should come next, and I honestly think the 'canonical' order is
> the right one.
>
> Yes, you are probably right about all that.  It was actually reading
> Innocents Aboard that really got me super-intrigued about Wolfe (after
> unsuccessfully reading through New Sun some years before).  Only then did
> I happen onto Wizard-Knight and devoured it and became hooked.  Then OBW.
> And /finally /at that point I got wise and went right back to New Sun and
> read straight through all 12 volumes of the solar cycle.  A weird path
> but I enjoyed it.  However, I shouldn't try to make my experience a weird
> lab experiment to recommend others to try.  You're surely right that
> everyone should go 'canonical' with the solar cycle after some more
> digestible introductory text (I would add FHoC to your recommendations).

Well, I don't really think there is a Correct Way to read GW, of course. 
Everyone's experience will be different and rich in its own way.
But since you've mentioned it, I think tFHoC should come after the Sun books 
- I read it before and somewhat regret that - as it is a difficult work imo, 
having the GW complexity in almost its pure state. I have yet to read a lot 
of GW, but my impression is that tFHoC is the one book in which there is no 
'simple' reading to find solace in while you're not yet able to get the rest.

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