barrington interview

Andrew Bollen · 07 Oct 2014, 03:29 · from 2014-October.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: jurisper at gmail.com (Andrew Bollen)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:59:32 +1030
Subject: (urth) barrington interview
In-Reply-To: <1412651538.92302.YahooMailNeo at web171306.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
References: <BLU175-W248DB1B5A985932992FD9CFA50 at phx.gbl>
	<CAF1072yG2TfhTTjxCgUDm2MmAd4K3fhbUQ6Ov9yWKTp7EfKWwA at mail.gmail.com>
	<1412651538.92302.YahooMailNeo at web171306.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAHXB04VgvisOiu535Z61nWdD7PqPY-KdEbmy69T=TfOmqkLy3w at mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Richard Simon <gallebuck at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> My own view on this is as follows: most of Wolfe's 'puzzles' have a direct
> bearing on the story; that is to say, they conceal information that could
> help the reader understand something more about the plot, the characters,
> the subtext, etc. They are functional, part of the mechanics of the story
> itself.
>
> Occasionally, when he thinks it is possible for him to do so without
> endangering the sense or misleading the reader , Wolfe will add a poetic
> conceit, usually a classical allusion. Decyphering it will add something to
> the reader's enjoyment but little to his understanding.
>
> I do not believe that symbolism in the work of Gene Wolfe has any
> relevance outside the frame of the story. I often see his interpreters
> present some example of the use of symbols that they have found (or think
> they have found) as a full and sufficient explanation of Wolfe is up to at
> that point in the narrative. They read it as an attempt to convey some
> extra-literary meaning. They are mistaken. Gene Wolfe is a creator of
> popular entertainments, nothing more. He is certainly a great author ?
> 'great' as in 'for the ages' ? but he is not a preacher or a philosophical
> huckster. He is a technician, a craftsman above all.
>
>
Wholehearted agreement!

Also: I think the most fruitful approach to Wolfe is via considerations of
character and ethics. Why did this character do this or that; and did he or
she act well or badly in the circumstances?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20141007/b7642936/attachment.htm>

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