(urth) Predictions Re: The Politics Of Gene Wolfe

David Stockhoff dstockhoff at verizon.net
Wed Aug 1 15:09:44 PDT 2012


Actually, nobody said that, and we obviously don't know the IQs of 
anyone born before the IQ test was developed, and the "founding fathers" 
were deists (who hated and feared Roman Catholics, but hey, nobody's 
perfect).

Otherwise, great comment!

On 8/1/2012 4:38 PM, James B. Jordan wrote:
> It's odd that a man who has written from a Christian, in his case 
> Roman Catholic, strongly libertarian, anti-welfare state, and 
> traditional conservative semi-isolationist perspective -- which after 
> all is and has been advocated by people with IQs well over 150 for 
> centuries and was the position of the founders of the United States -- 
> is considered loony for doing so.
>
> People who think this way need an education in history.
>
> JBJordan
>
> At 01:15 PM 8/1/2012, you wrote:
>> Dave,
>>
>> Thanks for the response. I just wanted to call out one bit...
>>
>> YOU WROTE: "I'm very inclined to agree with you, but at the same time 
>> it seems valid to wonder exactly how self-aware on this point a man 
>> in his 80s can be."
>>
>> I'm not sure if you have ever had the good fortune to hold a 
>> conversation with Mr. Wolfe, but as of last year, I found him to be 
>> the type of conversationalist that always to seem to be two steps 
>> ahead of you, ready with a quip, eager for an anecdote, anxious to 
>> counter point your point, in a wry, light-hearted, jovial manner.
>>
>> And that LAUGH! Equal parts genuine and sinister; the type of laugh 
>> to comfort you at the same time it sets you on edge.
>>
>> Not sure if any of that translates to acutely self-aware, but his 
>> opinions and outlook seems very grounded in relevant, present-day 
>> culture and not a paranoid Cold War outlook or anything to that extent.
>>
>> Just wanted to add that piece of perspective. I would be curious to 
>> any others who have gotten to know Mr. Wolfe how they compare my 
>> assessment, or if I am speaking from the minority on the matter.
>>
>> ...ryan
>>
>>
>> On Aug 1, 2012, at 2:04 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:
>>>
>>>     From: Ryan Dunn <ryan at liftingfaces.com
>>>     <mailto:ryan at liftingfaces.com> >
>>>     To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net
>>>     <mailto:urth at lists.urth.net>>
>>>     Sent: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 9:18 AM
>>>     Subject: Re: (urth) Predictions Re: The Politics Of Gene Wolfe
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Aug 1, 2012, at 8:55 AM, David Stockhoff
>>>     <dstockhoff at verizon.net <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net> > wrote:
>>>
>>>     >>> Sure, of course it was a lark. And yes, one could easily
>>>     interpret each one as /half /true. Where does that get us?
>>>     >>>
>>>     >>> As clarification, I didn't mean Wolfe /intended/ to predict
>>>     >>>
>>>     >>> "what cranky, ill-informed old people will
>>>     believe/fear/desire in 2012."
>>>     >>>
>>>     >>> And yet he succeeded---in my estimation, by /more than/
>>>     half. That must mean something.
>>>     >>>
>>>     >>> BTW, literacy paranoia has been in vogue in the US since at
>>>     least the 1960s.
>>>     >> Since a few posters were giving varying amounts of weight to
>>>     these predictions and letting it color their impression of him,
>>>     the place my observation was hoping to get us was actually out
>>>     of such a lofty critique of what I took to be a half joke blip
>>>     of Mr. Wolfe's musings.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> ...ryan
>>>     > Understood. But what's "lofty" about making an observation
>>>     about the written word---or trying to make sense of another
>>>     reader's observation?
>>>     >
>>>     > One could easily write whole books of criticism about the
>>>     paranoid style in Gene Wolfe, and in dystopian SF in general (as
>>>     someone has already noted). I don't know what they would
>>>     conclude, but I'd be interested in reading them.
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paranoid_Style_in_American_Politics
>>>
>>>
>>>     Dave,
>>>
>>>     I was not inferring your critique was lofty, in case I gave you
>>>     that impression. I was referring more to the earlier passion on
>>>     this thread, and felt that we (as a collective of readers with a
>>>     shared interest on a common mailing list) may have been taking
>>>     his written word a bit seriously.
>>>
>>>     My point is that he seems to be a bit flippant, half smiling,
>>>     and not all together serious in these predictions. So when
>>>     someone takes "a great interest in predictions and what they
>>>     reveal," for instance, I would hope that Mr. Wolfe's five
>>>     fingered prediction would have revealed that he is indeed a sly,
>>>     shifty, elusive prankster, even when portending to dole out 25
>>>     year predictions.
>>>
>>>     I got the vibe that it was not being interpreted with as light a
>>>     hand as that, however. In fact, I got the impression they were
>>>     used to support a feeling of disenchantment with him as a man,
>>>     which may have gotten me riled a little bit. While he may write
>>>     from an extreme, and detailed perspective on society, he does
>>>     not seem at all to be a dystopian, right-wing loon who is
>>>     increasingly using his prose to somehow push a conservative,
>>>     anti-socialist agenda (which was also inferred on this and other
>>>     threads recently).
>>>
>>>     Hope that clarifies my points on this matter a little bit better.
>>>
>>>     ...ryan
>>>
>>>     Yes it does, thanks!
>>>
>>>     Of course, in order to reach a conclusion that Wolfe was playing
>>>     specifically with "right-wing loon"-ness, one must first agree
>>>     that he came off a little "right-wing loon"-y. If you think he
>>>     wasn't doing that, there is still that cast or quality to
>>>     explain. I'm very inclined to agree with you, but at the same
>>>     time it seems valid to wonder exactly how self-aware on this
>>>     point a man in his 80s can be.
>>>
>>>     Ultimately, there's plenty of room between raising that question
>>>     and suggesting a conscious agenda. And I see no reflection on
>>>     the man himself---he's probably way more together than Heinlein
>>>     was in his later years. Gwern may choose to speak on that point,
>>>     or not.
>>>
>>>     In fact, the question tends to weaken the suggestion of an
>>>     agenda, which I find quite un-Wolfe-like. Much more likely that
>>>     he was not trying to be loon-y at all, in his own mind, just
>>>     playing along in his provocative way. But people do get set in
>>>     their mental pathways with age, and maybe these moments of
>>>     candor can be revealing. As a frinstance, my dad is also in his
>>>     eighties and still very liberal in outlook, but even he passes
>>>     along silly emails that reflect a certain, er, something. (No,
>>>     setting fires out West would not be a clever way for a terrorist
>>>     to create terror. It would require a lot of work by a lot of
>>>     people and they'd get caught. And so on.)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 <http://www.urth.net/> 
>
> James B. Jordan
> Director, Biblical Horizons
> Box 1096
> Niceville, FL 32588
> http://www.biblicalhorizons.com <http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net




More information about the Urth mailing list