Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rti-sel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!pyramid!decwrl!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!wfi
From: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Re: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun
Message-ID: <662@rti-sel.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Feb-86 13:37:29 EST
Article-I.D.: rti-sel.662
Posted: Thu Feb 13 13:37:29 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Feb-86 05:28:46 EST
References: <194@analog.UUCP> <3840005@csd2.UUCP> <651@edison.UUCP> <1808@hammer.UUCP>
Reply-To: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, NC
Lines: 35

In article <1808@hammer.UUCP> patcl@hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:

>I'll second that!  This was an outstandingly bad novel.
>Yet it seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must
>issue forth onto the net to demonstrate why there's such
>a large and uncritical market for so much bad SF.

Horses__t. The "Wulf" cultists are simply people who appreciate a
particular work and are attempting to share their reasons for
appreciating it with the other readers of this group. What the h_ll
ELSE is this group supposed to be about???

If you DON'T like a discussion, use your 'N' key to skip over the 
articles pertaining to the discussion. I personally don't give a
hoot about the interminable Star Drek/Star Bores discussions, so I
skip over them. I certainly don't enter a discussion I have no obvious
interest in to tell the people involved they're "uncritical" or
"cultists" for caring about a topic.

If you think the Book of the New Sun was an "outstandingly bad novel"
or think the comments that have been made praising it are incorrect,
please defend your position. You are claiming here that those of us
who admire Wolfe's achievement are uncritical cultists (your words). I
can turn around and say that those who dismiss Wolfe are insensitive
clot-brains. WHAT THE H_LL DOES THIS KIND OF PERSONAL ATTACK PROVE?

Net.sf-lovers SHOULD represent a diversity of opinion and present its
readers with viewpoints and opinions. That's why I read net.sf-lovers:
to learn why people like/dislike the books I read, and maybe to learn
about books I'm not familiar with. I DON'T read net.sf-lovers to hear
name-calling and ten-word informationless dismissals of works many
people feel have extended the genre. If you can't say something with a
measurable information content, don't say anything at all.

                               -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly