(urth) George R. R. Martin on Gene Wolfe

Tue Apr 28 11:48:57 PDT 2015

Long Sun/Short Sun at least has some of my favourite female characters in
all fiction:  Nettle, Marble, Mucor, Olivine.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm  very bad with names.
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:35 AM, aaron <aaronsingleton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wow. If she engaged you, would think you'd remember her name.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Fair enough, Marc, but ... I honestly think there *is* a problem with
>>> Wolfe's female characters. The only one I can think of who actively engaged
>>> me _as a person_ (rather than as a foil for the [male] protagonist) was ...
>>> and I'm going to blank on her name ... in _The Land Across_. You know, her.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Marc Aramini <marcaramini at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One more thing I wanted to briefly reiterate, which I have said in part
>>>> in my videos, but I DO think some of the criticism aimed at Wolfe is
>>>> ideological in nature. When I think of an author objectifying women, I
>>>> think of Henry Miller calling all of them c#$ts and interested in them
>>>> purely for fleeting sexuality,of the same interest as a quarter on the
>>>> floor (slightly more interesting because he will pick up the quarter AFTER
>>>> he is done with the girl) ... but because of his bohemian, against "the
>>>> man", anti-restraint image, the discussion of his work rarely involves the
>>>> rampant denigration Wolfe's female characters get. For whatever reason, the
>>>> sophisticated readers who gravitate towards liberal arts programs tend to
>>>> be of a different political bent than someone who is more or less a
>>>> traditionalist, albeit an extremely eccentric genius of one.
>>>>
>>>> There is an ideological bias in terms of public reception, most
>>>> certainly - though as far as a Hugo goes, as you said, Wolfe's difficulty
>>>> is reason enough, I think.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Nick Lee <starwaterstrain at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://grrm.livejournal.com/424135.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin had a few kind words to say about Wolfe and the New Yorker
>>>>> piece. He also brought up the Hugos and the Puppies again. There's some
>>>>> irony in that, isn't there? The Puppies, both breeds, argue that
>>>>> conservative, religious authors don't have a chance with the Hugos because
>>>>> they've been "taken over" by a left-leaning, atheist conspiracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> They never bring up Wolfe, from what I've seen, and you would think
>>>>> he's the perfect example. He's obviously Catholic and conservative, to a
>>>>> degree. See arguments about this in the past of the List and recently on
>>>>> Reddit. He's never won a Hugo despite numerous other accolades. You would
>>>>> think he'd be their most damning evidence. So what gives?
>>>>>
>>>>> I could make a snide comment here about how the Puppies probably
>>>>> couldn't understand Wolfe anyway, but despite the snark I think there's
>>>>> some truth in the idea. A corollary to the Puppy argument is that more
>>>>> traditional SF, adventure stories essentially, are not winning awards
>>>>> anymore. On one hand, Wolfe does write stories with adventure: knights,
>>>>> wizards, secret agents, etc. He's also been writing for a long time. He
>>>>> doesn't write simple stories, though, and while he pays frequent homage to
>>>>> the classics of the genre does not write in their style.
>>>>>
>>>>> And what about those accolades? Wolfe has won numerous other awards;
>>>>> he's a Grand Master; other writers laud him frequently. In an interview
>>>>> from some time back, China Miéville noted Wolfe's talent while
>>>>> acknowledging a difference in political opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reason Wolfe has never won a Hugo has nothing to do with his
>>>>> ideology and everything to do with the fact that he's a difficult writer.
>>>>> The fans vote for the Hugos, and they vote for what they're reading, most
>>>>> of which is more traditional and less literary than Wolfe's output.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wolfe is an embarrassing example for the Puppies because he doesn't
>>>>> fit into their narrative. I don't think he would play ball with them either
>>>>> because as Martin notes, he's "a class act."
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Urth Mailing List
>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aaron Singleton
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

-- 
Daniel Otto Jack Petersen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20150428/7c6685ac/attachment-0003.htm>