Lafferty

I would imagine that the lack of Lafferty discussion is due to the fact that although Wolfe and Lafferty share similar worldviews and Wolfe is a great admirer of Lafferty's works, they don't have similar styles. I would suspect that there are other Lafferty fans on the list, though. I certainly love Lafferty's work. Actually, another point would be that Lafferty's work is generally less open to the kind of minute "hunt for clues" that Wolfe invites. Lafferty seems to be a gestalt--you get it or you don't, and a search for hidden symbolisms or recursive structures is unproductive.

admirer of Lafferty's works, they don't have similar styles. I would suspect that there are other Lafferty fans on the list, though. I certainly love Lafferty's work. Actually, another point would be that Lafferty's work is generally less open to the kind of minute "hunt for clues" that Wolfe invites. Lafferty seems to be a gestalt--you get it or you don't, and a search for hidden symbolisms or recursive structures is unproductive. < I too like Lafferty, but all too often often I don't "get it". Sometimes I'm not so sure what there is to get, which may be related to why most of his later work only saw print from obscure presses. Last spring mantis was wondering where else in fiction he had read about the "fake" Venus de Milo. It rang a bell. I thought it was from the Master Forger bits in Where Have You Been, Sandaliotis?, but I couldn't find it there. Oh, well. Thanks for the input. Roy