An Evil Guest - An Object Lesson

Eric Bourland · 20 Mar 2018, 23:12 · from 2018-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: eb at hwaet.com (Eric Bourland)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:12:12 -0000
Subject: (urth) An Evil Guest - An Object Lesson
In-Reply-To: <CY1PR14MB06294217CD8D75B33DFC80C5DFAB0 at CY1PR14MB0629.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
References: <mailman.341.1521575675.5570.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
 <CY1PR14MB06294217CD8D75B33DFC80C5DFAB0 at CY1PR14MB0629.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <74ce4d9f-e4cb-c9ee-dca6-0aa05a080a2f at hwaet.com>

Dear Robert,


Actually I don't think you're all wet. Maybe she is pregnant. Maybe with 
twins. ;-)? I need to go back, read the materials that you have 
suggested, and read some or all of the book again -- all of which will 
be pleasurable. My instinct as a reader is, she's not pregnant, mainly 
because she does not have to be, to make the story work. Then again, 
maybe I have a limited view of how AEG works as a story. I'm ready to 
think more about it.


I think the AEG story is already doing a lot. It's a busy story. Would 
Wolfe, as a writer, add yet another component -- Cassie being pregnant, 
possibly with a demon child? Maybe so. But she's already got a lot to do.


I'm delighted to be wrong, and learn something interesting. If GW has 
left clues that Cassie is, or was, pregnant, then I would like to review 
them. I'll go back through your notes when I get some time, this evening.


In any case, it's a beautiful story, which is, I admit, what's most 
important to me. ;-)


Eric




On 3/20/2018 5:26 PM, Robert Pirkola wrote:
>
> On March 20, 2018, Marc Aramini wrote:
>
>
> >Cognitive dissonance incoming from the fasciest of textual fascists (me):
> >ideally people should be able to engage the text on the level they feel
> >comfortable with . . .?sometimes it is necessary to let people read 
> as they want to - for
> >some, Wolfe really is just a fun read.? . . .?I agree that we should 
> be speculating on Cassie's
> >condition ... but if that isn't important or central to the goal of other
> >readers I think it is okay. We all read for different things(but that
> >doesn't mean our plot exegeses are wrong, of course).
>
> I agree with your above-quoted points, Marc, and do not intend to 
> spoil anyone's fun.? I foisted the book on my mother to see what she 
> would think of the thing and she was bemused and amused about equally, 
> but she didn't go on a quest to figure anything out beyond what stuck 
> with her in her first (and likely only) read-through.? The point I 
> hoped to make about Eric's approach was that he was actively putting 
> on blinders to what the text was communicating about CC's body. And he 
> was apparently doing so because he had decided that it would be unfair 
> to measure Cassie Casey if she were in fact a flesh-and-blood person.? 
> I'm reading Madame Bovary at the moment.? If I were strongly opposed 
> to adultery as a commandment violation worthy of the death penalty, 
> would I:
>
> (A) read the book and filter out those bits that offend me, or
> (B) not read a book about adultery?
>
> I certainly don't mean to suggest that you shouldn't be free to read 
> the book, stick it up your nose, or paint with it.? But reading 
> someone advocate for the conscious exclusion of textual evidence?here 
> on this forum was a bit like finding a tortoise at the top of a flag 
> pole -- there it is, but *how* in the *world* . . .??!
>
> It would be unfair to Eric to classify his views and approach by only 
> the last post which I disagreed with, however.? I know from following 
> this list for years that Eric has posted several observations and 
> questions that indicate the opposite of what I accuse him -- that is 
> to say, he has shown a willingness to pry into obscure corners of 
> Wolfe texts and get down with the minutiae.? I hope he will continue 
> to do the same and tell me why I'm all wet with this pregnancy thing.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

-- 
Eric Bourland
eb at hwaet.com
https://www.hwaet.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20180320/bbc709c8/attachment-0001.html>

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