(urth) The Book of the New Sun vs. A Song of Ice and Fire

[David Stockhoff]

Agree on King. /Pet Sematary /gets dumped on a lot, but it has some 
truly great passages and scenes that turn your bowels to water. That 
baby . . . no one else would take it that far!


On 8/1/2012 8:48 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:
> Quick clarification for those dropping in: I, Daniel Otto Jack 
> Petersen, DID NOT WRITE THAT REVIEW. I merely copied in its closing 
> sentences.
>
> Basically, I'm pleased as punch that Wolfe's New Sun is being thought 
> of and engaged during and related to the Game of Thrones hype. I, of 
> course, tend to think it sounds kind of hilariously absurd to say the 
> Ice and Fire stuff excels New Sun in just about any way. Then again, I 
> just started reading Stephen King for the first time in my life 
> recently (I tend to avoid mega-bestseller stuff) and whilst he does 
> not have the literary merit of folks like Wolfe, I was utterly shocked 
> to discover that his storytelling skill can be pretty freaking 
> unbelievable and some of the characterisations are indeed pretty 
> powerful - and he's really overall got a unique voice by which he kind 
> of manages to hold his own in the literary scheme of things. I mention 
> this because it made me wonder if Martin might have some of these 
> qualities (I've never read any). I tend to doubt it for some reason. 
> I'm open to it, but I suspect David's intuition that Martin's stuff is 
> all surface with no depth is more likely.
>
> -DOJP
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:36 PM, David Stockhoff 
> <dstockhoff at verizon.net <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>> wrote:
>
>     On 8/1/2012 5:56 AM, Daniel Petersen wrote:
>
>         And where Martin’s books are driven by action and intrigue,
>         Wolfe’s are driven by unraveling a complex narrative arc with
>         incredibly tricksy literary elements.
>
>
>     That's a fine observation in 25 words or fewer, although my
>     initial impulse was to object to it as an oversimplification.
>
>     BNS has plenty of action and intrigue, but it is in a way a set
>     piece. If there is a "game" in BNS it is between characters
>     barely, if at all, on the stage. Severian appears to make
>     decisions but even on the surface is overtly constrained in his
>     choices in the same way any fairy tale hero is. This is one of the
>     broad authorial winks Wolfe throws our way, and on catching it the
>     reader begins to sense the many literary strata that hold Severian
>     as fast as any fossil. From there, the reader eventually proceeds
>     to full-blown detective mode.
>
>     But there is a another way Wolfe handles action differently. Not
>     only does Severian always surprise us, but he downplays his
>     actions as though they come naturally to him---which of course
>     they do, by definition. Raised in the Citadel as he was, action
>     and intrigue are /literally /nothing to him. Where other narrators
>     might directly remind us or boast of this background, Severian
>     reminds us indirectly (e.g., how others perceive him) and by
>     sudden, expert displays of violence. His utterly blase,
>     matter-of-fact view of such things almost makes him Methuselan.
>
>     As for Martin's books---does anyone more familiar with them than I
>     think there is anything /but /a surface level to them?
>     _______________________________________________
>     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