Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!pyramid!decwrl!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!jhunix!ins_amap
From: ins_amap@jhunix.UUCP (Mark )
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Gene Wolf
Message-ID: <1722@jhunix.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Feb-86 18:18:05 EST
Article-I.D.: jhunix.1722
Posted: Mon Feb  3 18:18:05 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 10:07:26 EST
References: <194@analog.UUCP> <3840005@csd2.UUCP> <11683@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Distribution: net
Organization: The Citadel
Lines: 71

>    I haven't read the books, and for all I know they are God's gift to
> mankind, but however good the books are the above is the definition of
> bullshit.  The writer presents the following as facts (not opinions):
> 
> 1) These books have the most literary value of any SF ever written.
> 2) No one can even question this.
> 3) He has an MA in literature/writing but can't say why the books are good.
> 4) Nor does he understand the books; in fact they defy understanding.
> 5) If you didn't love the book you're an idiot.
> 6) Once again, Gene Wolfe is the best science fiction author ever.
> 
> I for one find this sort of garbage extremely offensive.  Is anyone out
> there interested in answering the original question instead of lecturing
> the rest of us on our stupidity?
> 
>    -- David desJardins

I'm another one of those people to whom Gene Wolf is like unto a god, but
I have to agree with Mr. desJardins on some of his points.  Others are a 
little less cut and dried.

Points 1) and 2) are by definition absurd, or at least unsupportable.  There's
been an awful lot of SF written, and a significant portion of that has had
literary aspirations.  All of Delaney's work, a lot of Ellison (although no
one should tell him that), Tanith Lee's stories, the ones by LeGuin, all
of those were stories written as something other than hack work.  So were most
of those by almost any other "name" author of the past 20 years.  And don't 
forget the small-time authors whose work, though well crafted, might have 
slipped by us.  Literary value isn't something that can be quantized.  Which 
brings me to point 3).

All I can say about point 3) is to go out and read _Zen and the Art of
Motorcycle Maintenance_.  The book won't tell you why Gene Wolf is god, but it
might help people understand why I can't tell you either.  There are novels
that are well crafted, that flow easily, that have good dialogue and
interesting plot, i.e. technically flawless books that simply aren't as
_good_ as _The Book of the New Sun_.  _Green Eyes_ by Lucius Sheperd comes
to mind.  That book was a first novel, and blew me away, but it still didn't
have the impact that the Wolf's novels have had.  There are things I
could point to in his books and say "Look, a perfectly crafted section",
indicating the allusions, the rythmm of the words, the play on the readers
point of view versus the narators, and still you'd be missing the Quality
of the piece.  In that area of art, nothing really has a name, only a presence
that either takes the viewer into a new state of being, or does not.  Which
brings me to my next point.

In number 5) the original author is paraphrased such that he comes across
as saying all non-Wolf-worshipers are stupid.  I wouldn't have read it quite
that harshly, believing there to have been more enthusiasm than spite behind the
words.  If Wolf's work hits you, it generally hits you hard.  If not, it's
stuff that's a chore to wade through.  I've tried to indoctrinate two
girlfriends to the Order, with no success.  I still like them both (well,
one of them) fine.  I wasn't trying to increase their intelligence.  I was
trying to give them something great and good.  There are snobs, even in SF.
One of them may be sitting sitting beside you right now, but realize that all
enthusiasts are also elitists.  Bear with the mania of thy neighbor.

Point 4).  "Understanding" a book is one thing to work for.  For most
people it comes easy with most books, and Wolf's books have a perfectly 
understandable plot line (until the end when things get hairy, but if you've
gotten that far you won't mind).  There are other things to work for as well.
Finding all the nuances in the books to be found, that's something no one will
ever do.  I think that's what the original poster had in mind when he said that
about understanding the books.  I think someone once defined art as that which
is always new.  Who can understand something that is forever new to them?  Who
would want to?

As to who's the best SF author ever, that remains to be seen, doesn't it?


									Mark!