(urth) This Week in Google Alerts: Will No One Rid Me Of This Troublesome Writer?

[Craig Brewer]

Of course it's true that all writers "derive". But what people really mean (I assume) is that a writer is piggy-backing on an idea/style that another writer made popular or executed in a particularly excellent way.

The problem here is that the "dying sun" motif is only one part of New Sun, and it's not even what makes the book(s) exceptional. The opinion was obviously just written by someone who loves Vance, as do many of us on the list, and they're venting because Wolfe gets more praise. Understandable, even if the criticism is misplaced. I don't think anyone sees this as a valid criticism of Wolfe...the comments on that post seem to say as much, too.

On May 10, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Sergei SOLOVIEV <soloviev at irit.fr> wrote:

> I read Vance partly because he was mentioned with great respect by Gene Wolfe
> as one of the writers who influenced the New Sun series (with his "Dying Earth").
> Honestly, I was disappointed by literary quality of his work. The characters are
> in general very schematic, the language is sometimes interesting but dialogues
> are extremely artificial, nobody does speak like this, the composition very linear
> (Vance does use most of the time "travelogue" plan - "Ports of call" and travels
> of Cugel are typical examples). It doesn't mean that there is no impressive episodes/ideas -
> and great deal of intelligent irony that I like. I liked "Guyal of Sphere" for example.
> 
> Best
> 
> Sergei
> 
> David Stockhoff wrote:
>> Writer _X_ is not derivative?
>> 
>> Writer _Y_ is derivative?
>> 
>> This makes no sense. All writers derive.
>> 
>> On 5/9/2011 11:30 PM, Gwern Branwen wrote:
>>> Just in time for Gene's birthday celebrations:
>>> http://foreverness.createforumhosting.com/what-to-do-about-gene-wolfe-t337.html 
>>> 
>>>> This is driving me nuts. I'm far beyond my limit of tolerance for cover-jacket blurbs declaring Gene Wolfe to be "... the greatest writer in the English language alive today." and "... there is nobody who can even approach Gene Wolfe for brilliance of prose, clarity of thought, and depth in meaning." That's Michael Swanwick's embarrassing fawning, which has apparently become required promotional jibber-jabber for every book Wolfe gets published. Other literary critics who don't know anything about science fiction take this at face value, and occasionally regurgitate it with their own variations, completely oblivious to Jack Vance's work. And, readers new to science fiction (or speculative fiction if you prefer) are being grossly misled. They're amazed by the pebble but aren't told about the mountain. Don't get me wrong; I don't dislike Gene Wolfe's writing. I pounce on every new chunk of fiction he comes up with. I'll go so far as to say that his "The Book of the New Sun" 
>> i
>>>  s required reading for anyone who believes that some sci-fi is serious literature equal to the best in mainstream fiction. But, Wolfe is derivative. He obviously used Vance as a starting point, whereas Vance developed his literary voice independently. Vance is authentic and original, and Wolfe is the brilliant student. It's true that Wolfe's most recent work seems to be moving in a direction that is more of Wolfe himself and less of Vance's style and technique. Hopefully, Wolfe's future works will be ships with a wind in their sails that flows from Wolfe's lungs alone. But we're still being pounded over the head with the uninformed blather of Swanwick, et al. What to do? Who will sound the trumpet for Vance? Who will illuminate Vance's status as the progenitor?
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
>> Virus Database (VPS): 110510-0, 05/10/2011
>> Tested on: 5/10/2011 7:40:27 AM
>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net