Gene Wolfe (1931 - 2019)

William Hyde · 17 Apr 2019, 18:23 · from rec.arts.sf.written.2019.mbox

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: William Hyde <wthyde1953 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Gene Wolfe (1931 - 2019)
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <a79c31d1-a3e2-4c02-86c6-b4cc1cd4370c at googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
References: <q92gj7$e8n$1 at reader2.panix.com> <acd4eb35-b105-4dfa-b912-c49bcead50d8 at googlegroups.com> <ln3dbela3a9uu0mcq6tbuvge0f3he5n7v3 at 4ax.com> <q9698u$21i$1 at dont-email.me> <ghnoi1F3em4U1 at mid.individual.net>

On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 12:32:04 AM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wro=
te:
> In article <q9698u$21i$1 at dont-email.me>, Titus G  <noone at nowhere.com> wro=
te:
> >On 17/04/19 2:31 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:47:26 -0700 (PDT), Ahasuerus
> >> <ahasuerus at email.com> wrote:
> >>=20
> >>> On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 at 2:28:05 PM UTC-4, leno... at yahoo.com wro=
te:
> >>> [snip]
> >>>>  From Wikipedia:
> >>>>
> >>>> When asked the "Most overrated" and "Most underrated" authors, Thoma=
s
> >>>> Disch identified Isaac Asimov and Gene Wolfe, respectively [snip]
> >>>
> >>> Disch calling Asimov overrated is a bit like a fillet knife calling a=
n
> >>> axe overrated. Where is the finesse?
> >>=20
> >>       Since starting to read Asimov, I have always liked Asimov's work=
..
> >> I really liked his very readable science writing.
> >
> >I haven't read his fiction for decades but certainly enjoyed it and=20
> >agree that the introductory science writing of his was readable and=20
> >understandable for me whose Physics knowledge was mediocre high school=
=20
> >level.
> >
> >>       I never cared much for Wolfe's work.  What I tried was opaque to
> >> me, and thereafter, I avoided it.  Since we are on a RIP thread, could
> >> someone please point me and others to Wolfe works that we might like
> >> along with some whys?
> >
> >My experience was similar. I began _The Book of the New Sun_ once but=20
> >did not finish the second and remember nothing about it so will echo=20
> >your request with the added query; which authors is he similar to?
>=20
> Me too.  I remember when his _Fifth Head Of Cerebus_ came out I read the
> initial "Orbit" novella and the book version and just had the feeling I h=
ad
> totally missed the point.  Opaque or maybe oblique indeed.  I read _The
> Shadow of the Torturer_, felt the same way and more or less wrote off Wol=
fe. =20

I missed the point of virtually every Gene Wolfe work I read when I was you=
ng. But then I didn't get on with a number of great books until the second =
try (Pavane, Ulysses).

"The Shadow of the Torturer", though, grabbed me right at the start and I r=
ushed through it (missing mostly everything, as I discovered on a reread). =
 I gave it a third read a few years ago and it seemed even better.  Yes, I =
think  there is more than a little Vance in it.

The "Long Sun" books I thought were excellent, but for some reason I stalle=
d out in the first "Short Sun" book.

I read and liked "Soldier in the Mist", but haven't read the sequels.

He became a favourite author, and I'm sad to hear of his passing.
But glad he wrote so much.

If I didn't like a single thing he'd written, I'd still remember him fondly=
 because one of his collections was entitled "The island of Dr Death and ot=
her stories and other stories".

William Hyde

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