Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

António Pedro Marques · 14 Dec 2011, 13:32 · 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 13:32:05 +0000
Subject: (urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?
In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ6f-0Wh7gdfWrwO3z++zZrt2gfHSdcdZM53-RxqkR50nw 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>
	<4EE89815.3020908 at gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ6f-0Wh7gdfWrwO3z++zZrt2gfHSdcdZM53-RxqkR50nw at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EE8A555.1050307 at gmail.com>

Daniel Petersen wrote (14-12-2011 12:57):
> /2011/12/14 Ant?nio Pedro Marques:/
> /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.
> /
>
> Ah, well, here we do get into interesting reader-specific territory.  I did
> indeed read Fifth Head after the solar cycle, so I can't say for sure how I
> would have perceived it if I'd read it before that.  Still, I suspect it
> would have been a very good starting-point for me in the GW realm for these
> reader-specific reasons:
> 1) I generally like traditional SF settings more than heroic fantasy
> settings (i.e. the futuristic planetary romance of FHoC vs. the prima
> facie sword and sorcery of BotNS).

Curious bit here: I've never got the 's&s' feeling from any of the Sun 
books, not even NS. Nor do I get much futuristic sense from tFHoC (I do get 
it from various of GW's short stories).

> 2) I was hooked by FHoC first and foremost for the (to me) gorgeous writing
> *style*, the exquisitely crafted syntax and prose itself.  It stands out
> starkly in a sea of 'good-but-not-great-ness'.
> 3) All I need is wonderful storytelling and setting and complexity of themes
> and I'm deeply happy without needing to 'solve' various material 'riddles'
> the text throws up - the more philosophical or thematic questions of
> identity and alienness and cultural anthropology that the book explores
> (sometimes even by its very *form* - i.e. the second novella written in a
> totally different mythical or folktale sort of style) just blow my mind and
> I really don't *ever* need to discover for sure who's who or what's what in
> that tale.
> For other readers I know that indeterminacy would be maddening.  I'm fairly
> sure if I'd read Fifth Head first, I would have been in awe of what was
> clearly a brilliant writer and would've started hunting down all his stuff.

I don't disagree with you - but imo you can't really read tFHoC without 
being drowned in 'riddles'. They're just too many and everywhere and too 
complex for me to abstract myself and just 'enjoy the tale'. It's not that I 
want to 'solve' everything at every corner, rather the basic need to make 
_some_ sense of the events being told forces me to solve more than I can.

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