S&S vs. SF in BotNS

David Stockhoff · 22 Dec 2011, 20:38 · 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: dstockhoff at verizon.net (David Stockhoff)
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:38:43 -0500
Subject: (urth) S&S vs. SF in BotNS
In-Reply-To: <CAM0v-i65V8F6EwpefXCMCZRmvB2egQepUJo8DhR6boujzEVB6w at mail.gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W188091270D9F984D184E75CFAA0 at phx.gbl>
	<CAJ8=rtiiF1rc9--SXN88=i1JL-W4sK+XGexECUExDgifFr50xg at mail.gmail.com>
	<3850EDE39C6542408D247D83E4BD7317@Rover>
	<CAJ8=rtiATymZxj-HuAJbOOD6vMdHLJrTSWKhRX-NV78FK58a8g at mail.gmail.com>
	<DE8667965ABA4A5399F896EFD2954387@Rover>
	<CAM0v-i65V8F6EwpefXCMCZRmvB2egQepUJo8DhR6boujzEVB6w at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EF39553.5020207 at verizon.net>

On 12/22/2011 2:04 PM, Antonin Scriabin wrote:
> Sorry to chime in kind of late, but I just wanted to say that, like 
> Gerry, I am content to leave notions of the soul (and many other 
> things) as mostly mysterious in Wolfe's books.  Wolfe tends to avoid 
> writing "hard science fiction" or straight allegory and never (at 
> least, as far as the books I have read go) offers explicit scientific 
> or spiritual explanation for some things.  The explanation of deep 
> space travel that Father Inire gives is as much mystical as 
> scientific, for example; whatever the "truth" is, it is so well hidden 
> behind the motives and understanding of Inire, Severian, and the other 
> speakers / narrators that it probably can't be uncovered.  Personally, 
> I get more out of the story /not/ knowing or pursuing the ins and outs 
> of the scientific or theological explanations that might hold for a 
> given phenomenon.  There is something distinctly otherworldly about 
> the /New Sun /books that makes trying to force the events therein into 
> the confines of 20th century physics or Catholic theology 
> inconsequential to my enjoyment of them.

I totally agree with this sentiment, but I see physics and theology as 
inspirations and jumping off points for Wolfe, not as restrictions. I do 
get the sense that they are wielded as such by some here. But I don't 
think talking about them is the same as enforcing them.

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