Urth Net
Lupiverse(es)
David Stockhoff · 17 Mar 2012, 15:53
· from 2012-March.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: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:53:03 -0400 Subject: (urth) Lupiverse(es) In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ6QgKxkv8S+RKvfktsrQ02qyCSFYOUTOD8Br8VheuundA at mail.gmail.com> References: <SNT123-W51B170E1E982B63882B931CF590 at phx.gbl> <CAJ8=rtjTkzd8WDdHWCgtwaUbqAwmG7CweEB8eRVxX8KfTcvb0A at mail.gmail.com> <4F625444.8090002 at verizon.net> <12AA9CFAA3E7475EA584103C522FE938@Rover> <4F6279D2.8000306 at gmail.com> <CAMavq5Os1Ond+_m_xZFAtk=0mGKEF1Qt8dou1QEw449hmo1VLg at mail.gmail.com> <4F6286B5.2090808 at gmail.com> <4F62980C.8030700 at verizon.net> <4C2F11F1-598C-41D8-ACF1-6B08EB01390F at gmail.com> <4F62A897.7090109 at verizon.net> <1331866272.35596.YahooMailNeo at web121003.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4F633B9F.7000203 at verizon.net> <4F634BDD.3080309 at gmail.com> <1331917893.7498.YahooMailNeo at web84103.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <CAGB0RZ7cHk0=VR63K1YGnMRW6Q_nwGSk4_Bji-Kb0jNbfcY8cw at mail.gmail.com> <CAM0v-i7S-LSf26rie34uz5bZ_SQ7y_8CkiEj7UpkGM-cBb3Xig at mail.gmail.com> <CAGB0RZ4zc6LjirP+wQn6LRBWBcEhns+O7frT9XtsKOgzHVUZyQ at mail.gmail.com> <1331929942.59974.YahooMailNeo at web84107.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4F640E55.2040102 at verizon.net> <CAGB0RZ6QgKxkv8S+RKvfktsrQ02qyCSFYOUTOD8Br8VheuundA at mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4F64B35F.5090101 at verizon.net> The Victorians link the older, anonymous tales with the modern writers. We would have little today without them---not Wilde, Dunsany, Lewis, or Tolkien. I don't see much of them at their worst in Wolfe, but at their best---without a doubt. On 3/17/2012 6:06 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote: > Photogen and Nycteris is definitely one of the very best. Lilith and > Phantastes are certainly meandering and oblique novels - but I think > they're very powerful, undiluted fantasies - he taps into some deep > mythopoiea and faerie in these in my opinion - lots of great > individual scenes and elements too - plenty of creatures and not a > little horror also - he's always struck me as a phantasmagorical Poe. > I'd like to see whether their's a connection to Wolfe at all, either > overtly or unintentionally. > > -DOJP > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 4:08 AM, David Stockhoff > <dstockhoff at verizon.net <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>> wrote: > > Just for the record, I can't find the "dull" MacDonald story I > thought I was looking for, and I can only guess it's buried among > the many ebook collections of his fiction on my old hard drive. > > But /Lilith /certainly fits the bill, and /Phantastes /is not far > behind. No worse than William Morris, though. > > /Photgen and Nycteris /is one of my favorites, along with several > others I can't locate at the moment. > > On 3/16/2012 4:32 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote: >> I plan to read it to my daughter when she's old enough---in a >> year or two. That's why I collected all the MacDonald I have, >> though there was a selfish motivation as well. >> >> I have to apologize for shocking everyone, however. It wasn't The >> Golden Key I was thinking of at all. Had I read that as a child I >> might recall it more clearly than I did in fact---probably as >> much as Curdie---but I enjoyed it nevertheless. >> >> I am not sure which story it was that struck me as stilted and >> dull, only that the protagonist was a girl. But I shouldn't >> venture to opine until I get back home and find the physical books. >> >> Auden is amazing---no, not dull at all. But then he never wrote >> stories for children, or did he? >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Daniel Petersen <danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> >> <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> >> *To:* The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net> >> <mailto:urth at lists.urth.net> >> *Sent:* Friday, March 16, 2012 3:30 PM >> *Subject:* Re: (urth) Lupiverse(es) >> >> I really enjoy the edition where it's printed as its own small >> book, with illustrations by Maurice Sendak and an afterword by W. >> H. Auden. (And I'll side with Auden over Stockhoff as to the >> story and its author's worth - but maybe the Stock finds Auden >> dull as well? [If so only further proving my theory that he is >> inhuman.]) >> >> You know, I actually first read that edition aloud to my daughter >> when she was 5 or 6 and that was the go that really bowled me >> over. David, do you know of any bairns you can read it aloud to? >> >> (Does anyone have experiences reading Wolfe aloud? I've never >> done that, I don't think. Lafferty gains whole new dimensions >> when you do it with him - I wonder what it would be like with >> Wolfe. I picture it being more of a reading to fellow adults >> scenario, rather than to children.) >> >> -DOJP >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Antonin Scriabin >> <kierkegaurdian at gmail.com <mailto:kierkegaurdian at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The Golden Key was a favorite of mine growing up. I wish I >> could find my copy! >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Petersen >> <danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com >> <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's the >> BEST! You have no soul! You are not human, you are >> machine! >> >> (To be honest, it was on a second read that it blew me away.) >> >> -DOJP >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:11 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF >> <dstockhoff at verizon.net <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>> >> wrote: >> >> Golden Key: THAT's the one. Dull, dull, dull, dull, >> dull. >> >> ;) >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com >> <mailto:crushtv at gmail.com>> >> *To:* The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net >> <mailto:urth at lists.urth.net>> >> *Sent:* Friday, March 16, 2012 10:19 AM >> *Subject:* Re: (urth) Lupiverse(es) >> >> Try some of his short stories and novellas: >> >> Photogen and Nycteris (aka Day Boy & Night Girl, aka >> Son of the Day, Daughter of Night) >> Light Princess (aka Little Daylight) >> Golden Key >> Translations for Novalis >> >> Lewis and MacDonald never met. But Lewis credited >> MacDonald's fiction as an important element in his >> conversion. He (and the reception of his children) >> were important in the publication of Alice in >> Wonderland. Although he was a pastor for a time, his >> sermons and theology got him in trouble and he was >> eventually pushed out. >> >> J. >> >> On 3/16/2012 8:09 AM, David Stockhoff wrote: >>> I'm not sure which of MacDonald's books I consider >>> stilted and boring, although I encountered those as >>> an adult. But I loved the Curdie books my mom read >>> to me when I was four or five. >>> >>> On 3/15/2012 10:51 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: >>>> Phantastes was a beautiful book! Never besmirch the >>>> name of MacDonald! heh heh... >>>> >>>> As someone who was raised in a relatively >>>> a-religious family, I usually just ignored the >>>> obviously religious bits of Lewis/Tolkien/whoever >>>> else. But as I got older, I found that the >>>> non-"preachy" manner of fictional Christian works >>>> actually worked to explain why faith was >>>> interesting and attractive. After all, here was >>>> some fantasy that might be real on a certain level, >>>> or at least a number of people thought so. >>>> >>>> That's a perspective I've had trouble explaining to >>>> friends who had that "betrayal" reaction to Narnia. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> *From:* David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net> >>>> <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net> >>>> *To:* The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net> >>>> <mailto:urth at lists.urth.net> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2012 9:42 PM >>>> *Subject:* Re: (urth) Lupiverse(es) >>>> >>>> On 3/15/2012 10:32 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: >>>> > Wasn't MacDonald a good half century older? And >>>> he was one of those mollified Presbyterians. >>>> > But is it fair to criticise didacticism which >>>> didn't pretend to be anything else? I mean, neither >>>> MacDonald nor Lewis, that I know of, tried to >>>> present their books as doctrinally free. At least >>>> MacDonald was overt as to their didactic nature. It >>>> isn't Lewis's fault if the Narnia books got popular >>>> that they were pushed everywhere as mere children's >>>> books without a caveat that they were had a >>>> religious undercurrent. Maybe the real issue is >>>> that they are popular because that undercurrent >>>> pleases people, just as Praise of Empire pleased >>>> others, and those who take exception to that way of >>>> writing resent the popularity. >>>> >>>> Well, if it's boring, it's boring. And it depends >>>> on what you mean by "didn't pretend"---as with >>>> Lewis, most of his readers were children. If you >>>> have no idea what you might be reading, you can't >>>> know whether it's pretense or not. >>>> >>>> Certainly Lewis wasn't responsible for whatever >>>> marketing got his books in my local library and >>>> into my hands. But I doubt they were and are >>>> popular because they are religious: rather, they >>>> probably are popular because they are accessible, >>>> imaginative (sometimes magical, as you said), >>>> action-packed, well-written, comforting (Aslan >>>> always appeared to set things right), and morally >>>> nonthreatening. Girls read them as much as boys >>>> did, and no parents objected to them. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Urth Mailing List >>>> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Urth Mailing List >>>> To post, writeurth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >>>> Subscription/information:http://www.urth.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Urth Mailing List >>> To post, writeurth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >>> Subscription/information:http://www.urth.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Urth Mailing List >> To post, writeurth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> >> Subscription/information:http://www.urth.net > > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, writeurth at urth.net > Subscription/information:http://www.urth.net
An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net