(urth) The Distant Suns of Gene Wolfe

Matthew King automatthew at gmail.com
Tue May 29 09:00:54 PDT 2007

On May 29, 2007, at 6:26 AM, Daniel D Jones wrote:

> Worthy?  Really?  While the only factual error I can point to is  
> the one you
> pointed out - the conflation of the Concilliator with Christ - I can't
> imagine a much more misleading summary of TBOTNS.  His descriptions  
> of other
> works seem to completely miss the mark as well.  For a quick  
> example, he
> says "Peace" is "...[Wolfe's] only mainstream novel (also one of  
> his personal
> favorites), about a wealthy old man who builds museum-style rooms  
> in his
> mansion to match the rooms from houses of his past life."  Again,  
> factually
> accurate but that hardly describes the novel I read.  YMMV, of course.

Is the article illuminating for long-time readers of Wolfe?   
Decidedly not.  I do think it has worth, merit, or value, and is  
useful.  At a minimum, the article introduces Wolfe to an audience  
that I think would not normally stumble across his work.  Shall we  
brace ourselves for an onslaught of High Church conservatives? (First  
Things has always tried to be more ecumenical, and mostly succeeded,  
until the original editor stepped down last year.  The Wolfe article  
was published just after I let my subscription lapsed.  I try not to  
take this as a reprimand)

Some of my perception of the article may come from lowered  
expectations.  Outside of this list, I rarely come across any  
insightful discussions of Wolfe, as Michael Straight just wrote.

I do like the article's emphasis on the Soldier books.  _Mist_ is the  
book that hooked me for Wolfe, after _New Sun_ nearly chased me away. 

More information about the Urth mailing list