Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun

wfi · 13 Feb 1986, 18:37 · from net.sf-lovers.1986.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: wfi at rti-sel.UUCP
Subject: Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun
Date: Thu, 13-Feb-86 13:37:29 EST
Message-ID: <662 at rti-sel.UUCP>
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
References: <194 at analog.UUCP> <3840005 at csd2.UUCP> <651 at edison.UUCP> <1808 at hammer.UUCP>

In article <1808 at hammer.UUCP> patcl at hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:

>I'll second that!  This was an outstandingly bad novel.
>Yet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must
>issue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such
>a large and uncritical market for so much bad SF.

Horses__t. The "Wulf" cultists are simply people who appreciate a
particular work and are attempting to share their reasons for
appreciating it with the other readers of this group. What the h_ll
ELSE is this group supposed to be about???

If you DON'T like a discussion, use your 'N' key to skip over the 
articles pertaining to the discussion. I personally don't give a
hoot about the interminable Star Drek/Star Bores discussions, so I
skip over them. I certainly don't enter a discussion I have no obvious
interest in to tell the people involved they're "uncritical" or
"cultists" for caring about a topic.

If you think the Book of the New Sun was an "outstandingly bad novel"
or think the comments that have been made praising it are incorrect,
please defend your position. You are claiming here that those of us
who admire Wolfe's achievement are uncritical cultists (your words). I
can turn around and say that those who dismiss Wolfe are insensitive
clot-brains. WHAT THE H_LL DOES THIS KIND OF PERSONAL ATTACK PROVE?

Net.sf-lovers SHOULD represent a diversity of opinion and present its
readers with viewpoints and opinions. That's why I read net.sf-lovers:
to learn why people like/dislike the books I read, and maybe to learn
about books I'm not familiar with. I DON'T read net.sf-lovers to hear
name-calling and ten-word informationless dismissals of works many
people feel have extended the genre. If you can't say something with a
measurable information content, don't say anything at all.

                               -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly

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