(urth) FW: May 2014 Wolfe interview in _Technology Review_

[Lee]

>Gerry Quinn: I would say, rather, that I read the writing with care, and do not 

>tend to construct elaborate scenarios based on words found here and there.


This is another way of saying you cannot conceive of the existence, purpose or value

of a piece of literature in which 95% of what we are presented are lies and only an

indirect 5% can be construed as truth.


Fair enough. Perhaps you have never encountered a person who manages to delude

themselves about themselves and the world so thoroughly that much of what they

say has no real ring of truth to it.


I have and I suspect Gene Wolfe has also. I suspect he finds such people both 

revolting and fascinating, as I do. Very much a worthy subject to pattern much of

his writing on.



>Most of all - what's the point of all this supposed to be?  Why would 
>Wolfe write such a loose-end dripping farrago?


The reliability of Severian as a narrator was being explored in another thread. What 

IS the basis of so much reliance on unreliable narrators in Wolfe's work? Why does

he find exploring the minds of liars, self-deceivers and addled brains so interesting?


I understand it. I not sure I can explain it to someone who doesn't find any appeal

in finding one's way through a web of lies and deceit. But I get it. I suspect many 

other Wolfe fans do also. 


There is something intrinsically "human" about exploring this realm of dishonesty. 

Ironically, SF provides a platform in which "super-liars" such as the Inhumi and

Abos can be invented to more thoroughly explore this side of life and human

interaction.




.