(urth) The Wizard

Tue Mar 6 08:51:06 PST 2012

*if we didn't already know going in that Wolfe was a Catholic, we wouldn't
be making these conclusion.  It is only because we know he is a devout
Catholic that we put more emphasis on the Christian allusions than the
pagan ones. *

Naw, I *definitely* would've seen it in spades before I knew his personal
beliefs.

*Could Severian and New Sun be an "atheistic" work which shows a world that
Wolfe sees as a dystopia in relation to his own belief? Sure. *

Yes, but that would still not be an 'atheistic' work in the final sense -
it would be intending to mitigate against atheism, to slyly subvert it - in
which case it would be decidedly theistic work.  This is in fact a lot of
what Wolfe does, I think.  'Imagine a world with no God, no Christ:  not so
nice.'  But he doesn't seem able to leave it at this.  Into that same world
he also says:  'Ok, enough of that, now imagine God and Christ
theo-comedically showing up anyway, deviously agitating for redemption in
the midst of this dystopia or diaspora.'

I couldn't agree more about Wolfe being a fiction writer, not a polemicist.
 But, as you note, there are better, worse, and 'epic fail'
interpretations.  And that the (essentially) orthodox Christ is meant to
'triumph' (even if, paradoxically, only by his absence at times) is clear
to me FROM THE TEXTS, not from our knowledge that Wolfe is a Catholic (that
to me, is simply what clinches the view, pushes it over the finish line).

That's what I mean by saying 'come on, guys' you're not really, genuinely
in doubt as to the texts' own 'allusive hierarchy' in terms of what's
'primary' and 'secondary' to *carrying forward the artistic telos* of the
works.

-DOJP

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Craig Brewer <cnbrewer at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I always tell my students that there is no one interpretation that trumps
> all others because you can always say even more about a good work of
> fiction. But there are certainly wrong answers (New Sun is not an allegory
> of French wine tasting championships). And there are definitely better and
> worse ways of reading a text, even though we may argue about the criteria
> for better and worse.
>
> It's important to remember that interpreting isn't a zero sum game,
> though. There are certain facts about Wolfe's bio that should be taken into
> the context. His Catholicism is necessary. It's not necessaily a master key
> (as if a work of fiction is a mere puzzle), but once you know that fact,
> it's inescapable. But...that doesn't mean that the best readings will
> always conform to Catholic orthodoxy. (Besides, what does Wolfe take
> "orthodoxy" to mean...he's sometimes vague and playful about just that in
> interviews.)
>
> But it does mean that you have to take that into consideration when
> reading. Could his works be imaginative criticisms of his faith? Sure.
> Could they be ultimately just fanciful allegories of his beliefs? Sure.
> Could Severian and New Sun be an "atheistic" work which shows a world that
> Wolfe sees as a dystopia in relation to his own belief? Sure. In other
> words, there's a lot of wiggle room in interpretations that take his
> Catholicism at full face value without simply seeing the works as a
> transparent reflection of that.
>
> After all, if he was just a polemicist, he'd write essays. And he wouldn't
> need the doubly filtered "lies" of speculative fiction as a way to just out
> what he believes. I'm certain he does that...but he also does more.
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Antonin Scriabin <kierkegaurdian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> "But it's not all subjective, right?"
>
> A case can be made that it *is* all subjective, because we can never know
> the author's motives, but that seems like a petty objection (that, of
> course, leads to more petty objections for which we can thank
> postmodernism). <349.gif>  I just think talking about "primary" vs. "other"
> and "lesser"  allusions is just an odd way to think about a work of
> fiction; especially when people use phrases like "an allusion to" as code
> for "this part of the text *means*".  It is one thing to trace allusions,
> and another to draw grandiose conclusions about Christ having been in one
> universe or another, etc.  I think it reads a bit too much into the books,
> and that if we didn't already know going in that Wolfe was a Catholic, we
> wouldn't be making these conclusion.  It is only because we know he *is*a devout Catholic that we put more emphasis on the Christian allusions than
> the pagan ones.  And I *highly* doubt the knowledge that Wolfe is
> Catholic is a key part of the "literary analysis toolkit" he wants us to
> bring to his works.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Petersen <
> danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Aw, come on, guys.  It's not too hard to know which is 'primary' for
>> Wolfe.  And that doesn't have to take away from the enjoyment of reading
>> for those who disagree with Wolfe.  I don't try to press atheist writers
>> into a non-atheist reading when I know that's 'primary' for them.  It is,
>> of course, legitimate to play on those 'secondary' possibilities and
>> resonances if that's what interests you more.  But it's not all subjective,
>> right?
>>
>> -DOJP
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Antonin Scriabin <
>> kierkegaurdian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Perhaps we can all agree that what we see as "primary" might say more
>>> about who we are
>>>
>>> than what is clear in the books.
>>>
>>> Couldn't agree more, and I might add that this is one of the reasons I
>>> so enjoy Wolfe.  It is one thing to just stuff a story full of clever
>>> allusions and references, it is quite another to do so and yet create a
>>> world rich with potential, that gets readers to think and conjure up their
>>> own interpretations and inferences.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> >Dan'l Danehey-Oakes:  Not to agree with Gerry or anything, but clearly
>>>> the Christian
>>>> >allusions are primary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we can all agree that what we see as "primary" might say more
>>>> about who we are
>>>>
>>>> than what is clear in the books. Allusions to pagan mythology and
>>>> Christianity are
>>>>
>>>> both there. So which is more important?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The pagan and gnostic references do seem more primary to me. As I see
>>>> it, the references
>>>>
>>>> to Christianity are about the trappings of the church, not Christ
>>>> himself. There are
>>>>
>>>> roods and gammdions and signs of addition. There are various forms of
>>>> the eucharist and
>>>>
>>>> sermons and confessions and so on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is even a guy who resembles Jesus. But I see no Christ. I see no
>>>> christian salvation
>>>>
>>>> offered by anyone; not Severian, not Silk, not SilkHorn, not even The
>>>> Outsider. All  these
>>>>
>>>> guys seem to offer is material salvation not spiritual. Salvation means
>>>> surviving. Moving
>>>>
>>>> to a different planet or having your planet reformed or something like
>>>> that
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And that is the differece between, say, Moses and Jesus Christ. And
>>>> perhaps the difference
>>>>
>>>> between the brutal Old Testament demiurge and the forgiving New
>>>> Testament God. Moses led
>>>>
>>>> the chosen to a Promised Land. Christ led (and leads) to an entirely
>>>> new plane of existence.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wolfe talks about the Sun Series taking place in an alternate universe
>>>> than our own and I
>>>>
>>>> think this is the reason he needed that device. He could not build a
>>>> futuristic gnostic
>>>>
>>>> monster and horror filled world in a universe where Jesus Christ has
>>>> already appeared.
>>>> Once Christ has been here, that's it. Christian salvation becomes an
>>>> option. An option
>>>>
>>>> seemingly unavailable to anyone in Briah.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20120306/b15d2d7a/attachment-0004.htm>