URTH |
From: "Clifford Drane" <dranec@hotmail.com> Subject: (urth) the points of it all Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 13:56:16 CST >Well, argued, Cliff. Thanks! >But I disagree. Oh, drat. :) >>(snip) >>"I have always thought that this story illustrates the fact that there is >>not always a happy ending, and in many cases, no 'ending' at all." >Well, if this is the case, then why does this mini-story end with >Severian's promise to Foila that he will record, remember, and tell the >four stories? By doing this, he ensures that Foila and the rest will live >on--will have immortality, via the stories. They will be remembered, even >if only in the sense that their stories are remembered. This is Literature >in a nutshell--the stories are to be preserved and retold. And because of >this, Foila's death is not a complete end. The storyteller has achieved >immortality through her story. I see your point, and I think our ideas can co-exist. Yes, Sev promises to record the stories (and we are reading them, so he came through on his promise). But I'm not sure his promise was anything but a reaction to the area being decimated and everyone waiting for his judgment being killed. If they had lived, I think he would have judged (nice little sub-thread maybe - who would he have chosen?). What strikes me is that they were all so caught up in the storytelling, the consequences of the judgment to come - they had alot invested in the whole thing - And it didn't truly matter due to the attack. I think it shows us that nothing we care about, love, hate, etc. can stop fate or chance (whichever way you prefer to look at it). Things can irreprerably change or *prevent* an outcome - what's the phrase... coitus interruptus? I could be struck dead by a meteor while typing this, just as they were struck dead before the conclusion of the contest. The cosmos just doesn't care. >So I still argue that the point here has to do with storytelling. I might add that, while I agree, it's hard to argue against that because the entire series IS storytelling, by Wolfe through Sev to us. I can't think of a time when one could say it's NOT storytelling. >>(snip) >>"This, to me, is the ultra-refined meaning of the Urth Books. The Grand Unification Theory, if you will." >...After all, storytelling is the human attempt to define life and invest >life with meaning. If we can never fully grasp life, it is because we can >never fully tell our stories. Modernism is an exploration of this concept >(here comes The Sound and the Fury again!). ... and like in the film Rashomon there are many versions of the truth. I agree, but could insert that a story with no end is still a story, and "the end" is that it has no "end". Brain... hurt... :) >If you like, the four stories represent four perspectives on life. No story >is judged above the others because all four are valid, worthwhile, useful, >and beautiful perspectives. Well, I could say no stories are judged because the contestants were all killed, and the contest rendered moot. I can't imagine Sev *not* judging the contest, had they lived. He's an executioner - very used to making decisions and not getting emotionally invested in the consequences of his judgments. I think he would have judged, if the attack had not occured. Cliff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/