This Week in Google Alerts: R.A. Lafferty

Sergei SOLOVIEV · 17 Apr 2012, 18:09 · from 2012-April.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: soloviev at irit.fr (Sergei SOLOVIEV)
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:09:15 +0200
Subject: (urth) This Week in Google Alerts: R.A. Lafferty
In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ5W8oUbc6X1M9qSXbbD-ZXkwg2oCrpdB8ZGaWxAO1TBnQ at mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGB0RZ7UiWMRspR8c-XiOTTY5xuS6D--F1Td_-CAQ1CxrtqtPA at mail.gmail.com>	<1334675594.95733.YahooMailClassic at web161804.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>	<CAGB0RZ5yLD9BYEEZfLbhhn9FNw2Q_6Am3N02eRV3NV2eP+0EWQ at mail.gmail.com>	<1334682388.6567.YahooMailNeo at web114705.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<CAGB0RZ5W8oUbc6X1M9qSXbbD-ZXkwg2oCrpdB8ZGaWxAO1TBnQ at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F8DB1CB.1060909 at irit.fr>

What are the "lows" of Wolfe, to your opinion?

Sergei Soloviev

Daniel Petersen wrote:
> Wolfe definitely considered himself a significant step below Laff.
>  
> I can only attribute this to modesty and a failure to outgrow youthful 
> enthusiasm (much as I haven't outgrown Tolkien). 
>
>
> I don't think it was 'youthful' for Wolfe - they both had their first 
> stuff published in the 1960s - Wolfe just barely behind Laff.  If I 
> set aside my hyperbole (and my personal preference for Lafferty 
> overall over Wolfe overall), then I'd say they actually match for me 
> in terms of literary greatness - they both have their incredible highs 
> and lows and if I place the very best of each right next to each other 
> - it can be pretty close at times.  (Lafferty's still a level above.) 
>  Hey!  How'd that get there?  Can't control my parenthetical thoughts 
> just now.
>
> -DOJP
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jerry Friedman 
> <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com <mailto:jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
>     >On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Marc Aramini
>     marcaramini at yahoo.com <mailto:marcaramini at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>     >>--- On Tue, 4/17/12, Daniel Petersen
>     danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>     <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >>>And Tim Powers, two steps below Laff literarily, and ONE
>     BELOW Wolfe,
>      
>     Oh no no.  Lafferty has "beautiful moments and bad quarters of an
>     hour."
>      
>     >>>I think is very worth checking out for another highly original
>     Catholic writer of wonderfully bizarre fiction.
>
>     I did like /Last Call/ a great deal.  Not /On Stranger Tides/ so much.
>      
>     >>Oh my! Well, I will admit Lafferty is a genius, but his failure
>     to sustain a long narrative
>      
>     Or even a short narrative.
>      
>     >>of such consistently high quality definitely leads me to the
>     opinion that Wolfe is the more disciplined and consistent writer. 
>     Perhaps some of his stylistic explorations were more mundane, but
>     ...........
>     >>
>     >>okay, different strokes for different folks.
>
>     Apparently.
>      
>     >From: Daniel Petersen <danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>     <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>>
>     >
>     >Heh, heh, knew I'd raise some hackles.  I totally agree that
>     Wolfe is the more disciplined writer (maybe also more consistent)
>      
>     No, Lafferty's pretty consistent, at least on the scale of fifteen
>     minutes or more.
>      
>     >  - it's just that Lafferty's fiction, at its best, speaks forth
>     like something primal
>      
>     I'd have said the other way around.
>      
>     >- his main roots are oral and I think that might be what makes
>     the main difference - that being the voice for his wildly
>     unbelievable and amazing worldview.  Also, though, the more you
>     read him the more you realise the INCREDIBLE verbal control he
>     often has - his best fiction is very tight and disciplined and
>     exquisitely well honed and crafted - really surpassing the best of
>     Wolfe I think.  Wolfe definitely considered himself a significant
>     step below Laff.
>      
>     I can only attribute this to modesty and a failure to outgrow
>     youthful enthusiasm (much as I haven't outgrown Tolkien).
>      
>     >However, I have no qualms with people thinking them equal or
>     reversed.  I can't expect everyone to have the gifted insight into
>     literature I (and Wolfe) possess.
>
>     And Damon Knight, apparently.
>     >
>     >-DOJP
>     >:)
>      
>     Yep.
>      
>     Jerry Friedman
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
> 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