(urth) Lupiverse(es)

Fri Mar 16 12:53:45 PDT 2012

Ha, Pynchon aloud?  I've not read him but the impression I get of his work
makes me think that must have been an interesting or unusual scenario.

I just remembered I did once read a Wolfe story aloud to my kids - 'The
Friendship Light', just because I wanted to read them something scary.  I
skipped the brief mention of them taking photos of having sex together.
 That was some  time ago - I think the kids mostly just didn't get it if I
recall correctly.  (My 16-year-old daughter is now finally reading Wolfe on
her own and she's quite enjoying the collection* Innocents Aboard*.)

-DOJP

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Antonin Scriabin
<kierkegaurdian at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hhhmmm, the only book I have ever read out loud was *The Crying of Lot 49*by Pynchon.  My copy of
> *The Golden Key* I remembering being blue, with gold-looking inlays for
> the title, etc., on the cover.  It was very old and pretty.
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Daniel Petersen <
> danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I really enjoy the edition where it's printed as its own small book, with
>> illustrations by Maurice Sendak and an afterword by W. H. Auden.  (And I'll
>> side with Auden over Stockhoff as to the story and its author's worth - but
>> maybe the Stock finds Auden dull as well?  [If so only further proving my
>> theory that he is inhuman.])
>>
>> You know, I actually first read that edition aloud to my daughter when
>> she was 5 or 6 and that was the go that really bowled me over.  David, do
>> you know of any bairns you can read it aloud to?
>>
>> (Does anyone have experiences reading Wolfe aloud?  I've never done that,
>> I don't think.  Lafferty gains whole new dimensions when you do it with him
>> - I wonder what it would be like with Wolfe.  I picture it being more of a
>> reading to fellow adults scenario, rather than to children.)
>>
>> -DOJP
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Antonin Scriabin <
>> kierkegaurdian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Golden Key was a favorite of mine growing up.  I wish I could find
>>> my copy!
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Daniel Petersen <
>>> danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It's the BEST!  You have
>>>> no soul!  You are not human, you are machine!
>>>>
>>>> (To be honest, it was on a second read that it blew me away.)
>>>>
>>>> -DOJP
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:11 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF <
>>>> dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Golden Key: THAT's the one. Dull, dull, dull, dull, dull.
>>>>>
>>>>> ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>   ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
>>>>> *To:* The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net>
>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, March 16, 2012 10:19 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: (urth) Lupiverse(es)
>>>>>
>>>>>  Try some of his short stories and novellas:
>>>>>
>>>>> Photogen and Nycteris (aka Day Boy & Night Girl, aka Son of the Day,
>>>>> Daughter of Night)
>>>>> Light Princess (aka Little Daylight)
>>>>> Golden Key
>>>>> Translations for Novalis
>>>>>
>>>>> Lewis and MacDonald never met. But Lewis credited MacDonald's fiction
>>>>> as an important element in his conversion. He (and the reception of his
>>>>> children) were important in the publication of Alice in Wonderland.
>>>>> Although he was a pastor for a time, his sermons and theology got him in
>>>>> trouble and he was eventually pushed out.
>>>>>
>>>>> J.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/16/2012 8:09 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure which of MacDonald's books I consider stilted and boring,
>>>>> although I encountered those as an adult. But I loved the Curdie books my
>>>>> mom read to me when I was four or five.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/15/2012 10:51 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Phantastes was a beautiful book! Never besmirch the name of
>>>>> MacDonald! heh heh...
>>>>>
>>>>>  As someone who was raised in a relatively a-religious family, I
>>>>> usually just ignored the obviously religious bits of Lewis/Tolkien/whoever
>>>>> else. But as I got older, I found that the non-"preachy" manner of
>>>>> fictional Christian works actually worked to explain why faith was
>>>>> interesting and attractive. After all, here was some fantasy that might be
>>>>> real on a certain level, or at least a number of people thought so.
>>>>>
>>>>>  That's a perspective I've had trouble explaining to friends who had
>>>>> that "betrayal" reaction to Narnia.
>>>>>
>>>>>    ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net><dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>>>>> *To:* The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net><urth at lists.urth.net>
>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2012 9:42 PM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: (urth) Lupiverse(es)
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/15/2012 10:32 PM, António Pedro Marques wrote:
>>>>> > Wasn't MacDonald a good half century older? And he was one of those
>>>>> mollified Presbyterians.
>>>>> > But is it fair to criticise didacticism which didn't pretend to be
>>>>> anything else? I mean, neither MacDonald nor Lewis, that I know of, tried
>>>>> to present their books as doctrinally free. At least MacDonald was overt as
>>>>> to their didactic nature. It isn't Lewis's fault if the Narnia books got
>>>>> popular that they were pushed everywhere as mere children's books without a
>>>>> caveat that they were had a religious undercurrent. Maybe the real issue is
>>>>> that they are popular because that undercurrent pleases people, just as
>>>>> Praise of Empire pleased others, and those who take exception to that way
>>>>> of writing resent the popularity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, if it's boring, it's boring. And it depends on what you mean by
>>>>> "didn't pretend"---as with Lewis, most of his readers were children. If you
>>>>> have no idea what you might be reading, you can't know whether it's
>>>>> pretense or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly Lewis wasn't responsible for whatever marketing got his
>>>>> books in my local library and into my hands. But I doubt they were and are
>>>>> popular because they are religious: rather, they probably are popular
>>>>> because they are accessible, imaginative (sometimes magical, as you said),
>>>>> action-packed, well-written, comforting (Aslan always appeared to set
>>>>> things right), and morally nonthreatening. Girls read them as much as boys
>>>>> did, and no parents objected to them.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20120316/64f7f051/attachment-0004.htm>