Textual criticism of TBOTSS

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 15 Jun 2001, 13:17 · from whorl-v0012.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: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Subject: RE: (whorl) Textual criticism of TBOTSS
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:17:54
Message-ID: <whorl-v0012-0845 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/whorl/archives/v0012/0845.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> I definitely think it's easier than those, mostly because we have
> a single author at the bottom, that being Wolfe.=20

I deeply agree with Anna June (and Adam) on this point.

> Bishop Spong (considered by many to be a 'heretic', which I
> think is a ridiculously anachronistic term)

It is an accurately descriptive term -- though I don't know whether
it applies to Spong in particular. Within the context of a community
of faith (Christian or otherwise), there are agreed-upon tenets;
they are defining of the faith community. Within the context of=20
that community (and ONLY in that context), tenets which directly
or by strong implication contradict those community-defining tenets=20
are "heresy." One who believes such tenets is a "heretic," and=20
puts him- or herself outside the pale of the faith community.
One who teaches (or attempts to teach) such tenets to others in
the community is a "heresiarch," and is actively destructive of=20
the community (at least in its present form; it is possible that=20
the net result of such teaching will actually be a strengthened
community).

Some examples: Abraham was a heretic in the context of polythestic=20
Chaldaea; so were Peter, Paul, and the other Apostles in the=20
context of monist Judaea; so was Martin Luther in the context of=20
Roman Catholicism.

> [Spong] of the Episcopal Church has managed to explain the first=20
> three Gospels in terms of the traditional Jewish liturgical year
> without straining the text

It seems quite likely to me -- again, I haven't read Spong, but=20
the story as related in the synoptic Gospels is _deeply_ tied to
Second-Temple Jewish piety and liturgy. Many of the parables and
most of Jesus' encounters with the various priestly factions are
completely out of context if you don't understand that.

> In comparison, we know that Wolfe, as talented as he is, remains
> a single human being with - somewhere - a single writing goal,
> even if that/those goal(s) is/are unclear to us.

And here I must disagree, or refrain from agreement. It seems
very unlikely to me that Wolfe, or any other writer, has a
"single" goal in creating a work as complex as -- well, as any
reasonably-serious novel. (Disclaimer: I exempt from the term=20
"reasonably-serious novel" (a) most potboiling pulp adventure=20
novels and (b) most "yellow-journalist" novels like THE OCTOPUS=20
and THE JUNGLE -- "most" because there are exceptions, books in
both categories that exceed the minimal requirements of their
categories.)

--Blattid

*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.
*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.moonmilk.com/whorl/
*To leave the list, send "unsubscribe" to whorl-request at lists.best.com
*If it's Wolfe but not Long Sun, please use the URTH list: urth at lists.best.=
com

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