(urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

[Daniel Petersen]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Gerry Quinn <gerry at bindweed.com> wrote:
Given that Wolfe is best on a re-read, it’s logical that there can’t really
be a ‘best’ order!

Em, there's no logic I can see there.  The first half of the sentence does
not entail (or even imply) the second half.  At any rate, 'first
impressions' are usually hugely important for a number of reasons - e.g.
they can determine whether one wants to go on with an author at all and
they can also experientially set the stage for subsequent reading and
re-reading.  Some of my first readings of Wolfe books are still resonating
roundly with me and are an important part of my overall aesthetic
experience of his work.  Indeed, given that Wolfe is best on a re-read, it
might be more plausible to think that certain pathways into his work will
actually have differing effects on those very re-readings.  Agreed that
there won't be a 'best' order - but there may be orders 'better' than
others.  The 'canonical' order has been offered for the solar cycle and I'm
sure a good case could be made for this preference.  I don't think the fact
of Wolfe's work being best at the multiple-readings level makes the issue
of what order to read them in as trivial as your statement makes it sound.

But perhaps you were being *jovial* rather than trivial and I've made
overmuch out of mere facetious hyperbole!

(I concur with your ranking of the novellas in FHoC by the bye - and also
your thoughts on the flaws of Long Sun.)

-DOJP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111214/3f6de041/attachment-0003.htm>