Generic Considerations
Thomas Bitterman · 26 Apr 2003, 01:08
· from urth-v0304.mbox · original
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: Thomas Bitterman <tom at bitterman.net> Subject: Re: (urth) Generic Considerations Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:08:56 -0400 Message-ID: <urth-v0304-3331 at digest.urth.net> X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0304/3331.txt.shtml MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote: >H'mmm. At this point I have to ask the questions I've been unasking >throughout this discussion. I don't like these questions, I suspect >them of being inherently unanswerable. But: > >Correspondence with ... what? > >And what does "correspond" mean in this context? > >Unless and until someone answers those questions, which I don't >see anyone doing real soon, any "correspondence with reality test" >seems to me not only misleading, but meaningless. > >All of which is ... I think ... very relevant indeed to Wolfe and >his "unreliable narrators." I've always seen Wolfe's work as an impassioned fight against this line of thought. Wolfe likes puzzles, and tosses them all over. The problem with theories that "the reader brings their own meaning to the text", "the meaning of the text is socially constructed", and other vaguely postmodern-type-stuff is that it would be impossible to have puzzles if books were like that. Consider the puzzle posed in _Lexicon Urthus_: "Who (or what) is the intelligence in the depths of the mine at Saltus?". Many hours have been spent poring over the text and thinking about what it could be. If the meaning of the text were socially constructed it wouldn't be such a big deal - any answer you could get people to agree on would be fine. I hereby start the group that believes it to be a giant potato. It's favorite song is "The Eyes of Texas are Upon You" and it plans to cover the world in JuJuBees. That's a stupid theory. I know it, you know it, and Wolfe knows it. That's the point. Wolfe puts puzzles in to show that _the meaning is in the text_. He believes very strongly in the truth of a text. The Truth. The Text. If the truth-value of every text is radically indeterminate, why believe? >--Blattid Tom --=20
An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net