Free Live Free Two texts

Antonin Scriabin · 10 May 2014, 16:03 · from 2014-May.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: kierkegaurdian at gmail.com (Antonin Scriabin)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 12:03:43 -0400
Subject: (urth) Free Live Free Two texts
In-Reply-To: <CADpYOhqrxQssT9qX=D2ALKEJ+QK7gEj4AQF-5Hy3q-cbjWYcLg at mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADpYOhqrxQssT9qX=D2ALKEJ+QK7gEj4AQF-5Hy3q-cbjWYcLg at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM0v-i4eBRTfCGs8rswiEf-sMg=TdxRegZfs7XRvw5_OqyRm=A at mail.gmail.com>

I just finished the 1984 version, and can't imagine doing without 4000
words. I haven't read the Tor version. I would say have the best of both
worlds; read the longer version with the benefit of the chronology when you
need it. It was fantastic by the way, one of my favorite of his stand
alones.
On May 10, 2014 1:41 AM, "Austin Hackett" <austin.hackett at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, new member here. I joined up to find out which version of *Free Live
> Free* is preferable to read?
>
> I haven't read *Free Live Free* but plan on doing so soon. It just so
> happens I have both the 1984 Mark V. Ziesing small press edition and the
> standard 1986 Tor mass market version on my shelf. Several places online
> say the Tor is shorter by about 4000 words. I also notice that it contains
> a chronology (which, it says, was requested by the publisher) and the title
> of the first chapter is different. The order of some parts may also be
> different between the two versions according to vague reports.
>
> Does the Tor edition represent an editorially truncated text or the
> author's final revisions? Some might think "longer = better" but I don't
> want to assume anything. Maybe Wolfe shortened the book at the behest of
> the publisher, but he may have just revised it for his own artistic
> purposes. Even if the cuts were mandated, he may have taken the opportunity
> to make different changes as well. And none of these factors actually
> determine which version is *better*.
>
> So has anyone read both, or at least knows a little about the backstory? I
> can't find any info online.
>
> Thanks!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20140510/d20806eb/attachment.htm>

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