(urth) This Week in Google Alerts: R.A. Lafferty

[Sergei SOLOVIEV]

What are the "lows" of Wolfe, to your opinion?

Sergei Soloviev

Daniel Petersen wrote:
> Wolfe definitely considered himself a significant step below Laff.
>  
> I can only attribute this to modesty and a failure to outgrow youthful 
> enthusiasm (much as I haven't outgrown Tolkien). 
>
>
> I don't think it was 'youthful' for Wolfe - they both had their first 
> stuff published in the 1960s - Wolfe just barely behind Laff.  If I 
> set aside my hyperbole (and my personal preference for Lafferty 
> overall over Wolfe overall), then I'd say they actually match for me 
> in terms of literary greatness - they both have their incredible highs 
> and lows and if I place the very best of each right next to each other 
> - it can be pretty close at times.  (Lafferty's still a level above.) 
>  Hey!  How'd that get there?  Can't control my parenthetical thoughts 
> just now.
>
> -DOJP
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jerry Friedman 
> <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com <mailto:jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
>     >On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Marc Aramini
>     marcaramini at yahoo.com <mailto:marcaramini at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>     >>--- On Tue, 4/17/12, Daniel Petersen
>     danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>     <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >>>And Tim Powers, two steps below Laff literarily, and ONE
>     BELOW Wolfe,
>      
>     Oh no no.  Lafferty has "beautiful moments and bad quarters of an
>     hour."
>      
>     >>>I think is very worth checking out for another highly original
>     Catholic writer of wonderfully bizarre fiction.
>
>     I did like /Last Call/ a great deal.  Not /On Stranger Tides/ so much.
>      
>     >>Oh my! Well, I will admit Lafferty is a genius, but his failure
>     to sustain a long narrative
>      
>     Or even a short narrative.
>      
>     >>of such consistently high quality definitely leads me to the
>     opinion that Wolfe is the more disciplined and consistent writer. 
>     Perhaps some of his stylistic explorations were more mundane, but
>     ...........
>     >>
>     >>okay, different strokes for different folks.
>
>     Apparently.
>      
>     >From: Daniel Petersen <danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>     <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>>
>     >
>     >Heh, heh, knew I'd raise some hackles.  I totally agree that
>     Wolfe is the more disciplined writer (maybe also more consistent)
>      
>     No, Lafferty's pretty consistent, at least on the scale of fifteen
>     minutes or more.
>      
>     >  - it's just that Lafferty's fiction, at its best, speaks forth
>     like something primal
>      
>     I'd have said the other way around.
>      
>     >- his main roots are oral and I think that might be what makes
>     the main difference - that being the voice for his wildly
>     unbelievable and amazing worldview.  Also, though, the more you
>     read him the more you realise the INCREDIBLE verbal control he
>     often has - his best fiction is very tight and disciplined and
>     exquisitely well honed and crafted - really surpassing the best of
>     Wolfe I think.  Wolfe definitely considered himself a significant
>     step below Laff.
>      
>     I can only attribute this to modesty and a failure to outgrow
>     youthful enthusiasm (much as I haven't outgrown Tolkien).
>      
>     >However, I have no qualms with people thinking them equal or
>     reversed.  I can't expect everyone to have the gifted insight into
>     literature I (and Wolfe) possess.
>
>     And Damon Knight, apparently.
>     >
>     >-DOJP
>     >:)
>      
>     Yep.
>      
>     Jerry Friedman
>     _______________________________________________
>     Urth Mailing List
>     To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto: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