(urth) Fiction and Wolfe's personal beliefs

[Chris P]

I would say that while it is not a master-key, it is something that allows dimensions of interpretation that would otherwise be unavailable, and that seem to have a substantial foundation in some of his texts.

Another thing I could say that might be more controversial, though I think most people on this list accept it, is that Wolfe is a writer (and certainly there have been many of them) that attempts to use his writing to display a sort of moral truth. The truth doesn't necessarily have to be literally in what he says, but it is *shown* in one way or another, and sometimes (obviously) very indirectly. And generally speaking most of us think that an interpretation of Wolfe that lacks this aspect - or pushes it out to a marginal/trivial position - is deficient in some way.

-- 
"When small men begin to cast big shadows, it means that the sun is about to set." -- Lin Yutang



> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:38:51 -0800
> From: cnbrewer at yahoo.com
> To: urth at lists.urth.net
> Subject: (urth) Fiction and Wolfe's personal beliefs
> 
> So a lot of the theological discussion raises certain questions for me:
> 
> Certainly Wolfe is a Catholic. Must his fiction also be Catholic?
> 
> And if it is theologically orthodox, where are we to find that orthodoxy?
> 
> A case in point is Peter Wright's interpretation. For Wright *all* of the New Sun basically boils down to an exercise in religion-as-conspiracy. In sum, for Wright, New Sun ultimately has no religious aspect at all. Rather, the Hieros create a conspiracy in which everything *looks* orthodox but is, in fact, nothing of the sort. Severian is manipulated through and through, even (and especially) when he thinks he's finally in direct contact with the divine. Throughout, according to Wright, he's simply a tool. And, what's more, all of the evidence that we are given that Severian is in fact part of a larger mythological story is not transcendence, but, in fact, further evidence of the thoroughness of the cosmic conspiracy.
> 
> My point is that Wright never tries to claim that Wolfe, himself, goes against his own beliefs. But he points out how it's possible to read his fiction as not at all straightforwardly an expression of personal faith. Rather, one might say that Wright's interpretation gives a story in which Wolfe shows how his own faith could be used in a very false way, inspiring faith but without any real substance.
> 
> My real question here is whether invoking Wolfe's faith is really a kind of master-key to his texts. Certainly it *informs* his fiction in countless ways, but does every one of his works ultimately have to be an allegory of his own beliefs?
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20090123/102c0ca6/attachment-0005.htm>