(urth) The Sorcerer's House Questions (*Major Spoilers*)

[Eugene Zaretskiy]

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Craig Brewer <cnbrewer at yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the end, I'm not convinced that the entire thing was a total fabrication.
> But I am convinced that Wolfe means us to think that it's a possibility
> since, otherwise, I have a hard time understanding why Bax should ever have
> been a con man at all, unless it was just an easy way to get the character
> into (and then out of) jail.

This is what I think, too. Craig, earlier you said it made sense for
Wolfe to write a novel where the fantasy elements are fabrications.
Similarly, maybe his objective is more nuanced than that (Wolfe?
Nuanced? Crazy, I know) and he wants to "con" readers into believing
whatever they want about Bax's story. If there's a level to this book
where Bax is the compiler and made everything up, I don't think it's
the ONLY path to understanding the book as a whole, but I agree with
you that Bax's being a con man and other such details are placed by
Wolfe to add to this particular reading. I'm amazed that the "debate"
has gone on for so long, though; you either believe it and toss away
any hope of understanding the book as a puzzle box (this approach
being understandably labeled "lame" by some) or you don't believe it.

I get this feeling GW would be highly amused by all this. (Does he
read this list?) Can't the "Bax made it all up" theory co-exist with
the puzzle box version?

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>



-- 
Eugene Z
http://blog.eugenez.net