(urth) Who's Right?

[Gerry Quinn]

-From: "Lee Berman" <severiansola at hotmail.com>
>
> In recent posts as diverse as Gerry Quinn's, Mark Millman's and Thomas 
> Bitterman's, as well as
> many times in the past, I've noticed the implication that this message 
> board might not serve simply
> as a place for sharing ideas.
>
> I am wondering how many here at least partially consider their role here 
> to be serving as a jury member,
> with a duty to render judgement or cast a vote on whether a presented idea 
> is too outlandish or
> over-interpreted or perhaps actually worthy of entry in the Accepted 
> Lupine Gospel (or whatever it was
> that Roy C. Lackey called it).

I wasn't implying anything of that kind.  I *do* think that criticising 
ideas is as important as sharing them.  Ideas per se are almost worthless; 
anybody can come up with a million of them.  We need ideas that have 
explanatory power, and some degree of consistency with the text as a whole. 
(This was what I was hinting at when I suggested Vine might come from 
Viron - that's a deliberate example of a *bad* idea, and if I had gone on to 
talk about how it could have been arranged by time travelling hierodules for 
some obscure purpose, it would just have made it worse.)

> Except for a few slips in certain interviews, we know Gene Wolfe ain't 
> talking. So is it a legitimate
> function of this board to serve as a review panel? Perhaps even with some 
> measure of authority? Just
> curious what people think about this.

I certainly am not angling for any such idea.  Certainly a formal voting 
procedure would not only be divisive but would lead to problems of sock 
puppetry or worse.  I don't even believe in the concept of a definitive 
Lupine Gospel - there are lots of things on which there is plenty of room to 
disagree.

But I certainly don't believe in giving ideas I consider excessively 
fanciful a free pass.  Ideas need quality control!  I am probably one of the 
more conservative posters here in terms of evaluating new ideas, and no 
doubt those who are more inclined to 'let a thousand flowers bloom' 
sometimes find my objections irritating.  All I can suggest is that they 
take them in the spirit of Nietzche's maxim: "What does not kill me makes me 
stronger".  Ideas that can stand up to objections are the sort of ideas that 
can progress rather than derail understanding.

- Gerry Quinn