(urth) barrington interview

[Lee]

>Jeffrey Wilson:  This does not make it sound any less reasonable to me. 

>There is no particular need for all the puzzles to be of the same difficulty or the 
>answers to have the same verifiability. Some of the easiest puzzles may 
>have the hardest to verify answers if the hardest puzzles are built on 
>them.


For me this is a dodging of the essential question here. Which is:


Who is right?


In another interview, Wolfe said something about all the crazy theorists of his

work but that there were some readers who basically understood all his work.


There are thousands of Wolfe readers who have spent much time and thought

trying to understand his work. Which are the ones who have the correct understanding?

Who are the ones who are way off base?


Without an authoritative identification of who is getting things right and wrong, we are 

each given an open invitation to assume that one of the readers who does get Wolfe

correctly is, of course, ourselves.


If Borksi were still posting on this board I'm sure he'd be able provide multiple reasons for 

why he is right and Marc is wrong. If there is truly to be some sort of assessment of correct 

 interpretation, there needs to be auctorial authority or at least a  firm majority consensus to

base it on. On most of the issues which are discussed here, I don't see either.