|
Amethyst posted:This, to me is what makes BOTNS a (very good) sci-fi curio rather than a deeply meaningful work. Oh, come on. Is this sarcasm or for real? Where do you draw the line? And are you at least aware that the line does not exist and is entirely subjective? And, consequently, do you realize that a story that knows itself as false becomes meaningful exactly for that reason? Encryptic posted:I guess I just can't see that being a huge strike against him since BotNS isn't really about the plot. Erikson, et al are writing for a completely different audience whereas Wolfe is pretty much the thinking man's sci-fi/fantasy writer. I'm not bagging on Erikson - he's good at what he does but he's not working in the same mode as Wolfe. Nothing wrong with that. Care to elaborate what you intend with "not working in the same mode"? Abalieno fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Nov 19, 2011 |
# ¿ Nov 19, 2011 03:13 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 20:27 |
|
I'll explain better my point. From Shivcraft reply it seems that "literature" is defined by some form of what I generalize as "messing with the medium". From that perspective it's true that Wolfe is close to the Joyce and Proust, Erikson a step below, and then most other writers Sanderson, Abercrombie, Lynch, who are more focused on telling the story and engage the reader. What he says in that paragraph would apply perfectly to Erikson as well, but the messing with the medium he does is more subtle and what one notices reading is the level of the story. This because it's Erikson's purpose, as those other writers, he doesn't want to sacrifice the story. While for most "literary" writers the messing with the medium is more "in your face", true for both Joyce and Proust used as examples. But this specific way of organizing things doesn't work too well if we consider something like The Road by Cormac McCarthy, that was also brought up above as an example of "literature". This book has one of the most simple structures, written in a straightforward way, and ALL about the level of the story, void of technicality and sophistication. So? Why literature? Merely because he always wrote outside the genre and so the brand carries over in the rare case he writes some form of sci-fi? Abalieno fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Nov 19, 2011 |
# ¿ Nov 19, 2011 03:38 |
|
From Lexicon Urthus: Ascians: the legendary inhabitants of the equatorial area, who twice a year have the sun directly overhead at noon, and then cast no shadow. But they are in the series the nation in the Northern hemisphere. Yesterday I read a chapter in the second book of the New Sun, called: The Tale of the Student and His Son. Could someone explain me what's the point? He arbitrarily stops the story to put that decontextualized tale in there, but that tale doesn't seem related in any way to what was going on, neither it has thematic connections of any kind. On Lexicon Urthus I read it is connected to the myth of Theseus and the Minotaur, but why? I mean, what should I get from those pages beside frustration? There is no apparent meaning, the story is hard to read because of its language, and it makes no sense since there's no logical flow, making it a bad story in its own right.
|
# ¿ Dec 4, 2011 07:49 |
|
The "use" in the story was mostly to trigger Thecla's memory (through the brown book) and so remember the secret door to escape the antechamber. A deus ex machina if you want. There's also the fleshing of a "son" made of dreams, since Thecla seems also to appear in some ways. The part of the myth that Jonas says has changed is specifically the myth of Theseus, that explains how the myth lost its original meaning to acquire a different one (same as when they find "Kimleesoong", it's to show our own world in the distant past). But I still don't grasp any relevant interpretation.
|
# ¿ Dec 4, 2011 18:48 |
|
_jink posted:It's so difficult to find other writers who even attempt that almost abstract scifi that I find so evocative. Viriconium? It's almost the same thing...
|
# ¿ Dec 5, 2011 20:35 |