(urth) Gene Wolfe is for Socialists

[Gerry Quinn]

Agreed.  Mieville made it pretty clear.

Mieville is good, though currently a little over-rated, I think.  I read _Perdido Street Station_ and enjoyed it, but am in no great rush to read the sequels.  I also enjoyed _The City and the City_ which is a pretty interesting take on a bizarre Borgesian world set on present day Earth, with no supernatural element.

- Gerry Quinn


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Matthew Keeley 
  To: The Urth Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 2:40 AM
  Subject: Re: (urth) Gene Wolfe is for Socialists


  My politics are very far from Mieville's, though I admired the one Mieville story I've read so far. And Mieville admits that not all the writers he cites are anywhere near socialist, or even on the left. Consider his comments on Keith Roberts' Pavane:


  On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Matthew Knight <jacobeiserman at gmail.com> wrote:

    I'm with Pedro on this one.  I think the list's author is finding something of value in 5HOC when viewed through a socialist lens, despite recognizing vast differences between Wolfe's perspective and his own.  Here's my own sweeping generalization that is likely logically unprovable: most good art can be appreciated from a variety of angles, insofar as the art reflects something true about life and the angles from which the art is viewed are able to discern some kind of truth, even if distorted.

    On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Pedro Pereira <domus_artemis at hotmail.com> wrote:

      I don't see why is it wishful thinking on the part of the blog author (it's not even the author, this is a list by Mielville for the blog site). Mielville didn't claim Wolfe was Socialist or that his work was socialist bent. What he says is this:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20101221/4bc550dd/attachment-0004.htm>