(urth) interview questions

[Lee Berman]

>Jerry Friedman: Whereas it's okay to be sure you're right some of the time, as on Veil's 
>Hypothesis?
 
Actually, I am much more firmly in Jane Delawney's camp. I don't think there can be a true
establishment of "correctness" when it comes to fiction. By its nature, fiction, especially
ambiguous fiction such as Wolfe's, impels us to use our own inherent biases and prejudices
to fill in the gaps and holes in our own way. (Heck the same process occurs in perception
of non-fiction, like news of the world. Political opposites will see the same news event 
and interpret it in opposite fashion- e.g. a heavy snowfall is seen as both proof and disproof
of global warming).
 
The relaxation engineering priniciple being discussed is a good example. My own education in
engineering is limited to biological applications and my own experience in dealing with it
in regard to irregular objects involved successive attempts at perfection in measurement.
 
I am willing to defer to those who understand engineering better than I do and accept that
reference as pertaining to the lack of progress toward perfection in cloning rather than a
succession toward perfection in imitation. My own education prejudiced me toward what seems to be 
an errant interpretation.
 
And that's why I'm here. I recognize I have more to learn from all the others here than to teach
them. My ideas about Wolfe's work evolve on a daily basis.