<--prev V30 next-->
From: "Alice Turner" <pei047@attglobal.net>
Subject: (urth) Re: Digest urth.v030.n185
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:04:56
----- Original Message -----
From: <urth-errors@lists1.ba.best.com>
To: <urth@lists1.ba.best.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 11:53 AM
Subject: Digest urth.v030.n185
>
> -------------- BEGIN urth.v030.n185 --------------
>
> 001 - "Matthew Davis" <matthew@ - "Love's Labour's Lost" in John
Crowley's AEgypt
> 002 - James Jordan <jbjordan4@h - Re: (urth) In Glory Like Their
Star (SPOILERS) F&SF Mag story
>
> URTH Digest -- for discussion of Gene Wolfe's New Sun and other works
>
>
> --------------- MESSAGE urth.v030.n185.1 ---------------
>
> From: "Matthew Davis" <matthew@michaelscycles.freeserve.co.uk>
> Subject: "Love's Labour's Lost" in John Crowley's AEgypt
> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 16:42:35 +0100
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C13F97.C133E5E0"
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C13F97.C133E5E0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> I know this is primarily a space for discussion of Gene Wolfe, but
since =
> John Crowley does seem to pop up quite regularly I though it might be
a =
> worthwhile space to test out the observations below. I don't know if =
> anyone else has discussed the relationship of "Love's Labour's Lost"
to =
> John Crowley's "Aegypt" - it seems obvious to me but I haven't seen it
=
> mentioned in any of the reviews or essays - so if all of the below is
=
> well known then I apologise for wasting your time.
>
> On the surface, Crowley's only use of LLL is for the title of Kraft's
=
> autobiography and to acknowledge the origins of that title. This all =
> occurs within the consciousness of Rosie, and the only things they
evoke =
> for her are own depression, forlornness and sense of solitude. If you
=
> didn't otherwise know you might think LLL is a tragedy, from such a =
> deliberate misreading of what is actually a comedy. Although a comedy
=
> that is almost very nearly a problem play.
>
> I
>
> If we look at the plot, we can see a use similar to that Crowley makes
=
> of "the Solitudes" as an organising principle: a group of =
> scholars/knights retreat from the world, makes vows of celibacy and =
> forswear love so that they may concentrate on their studies that will
=
> bring them fame and triumph over death and time. Of course the real =
> world breaks in upon when they fall in love, and their experience at
the =
> hands of the objects of their desire leaves them compromised and their
=
> vaunted intellectualism humiliated. Sounds a little like Pierce, yes?
=
> Most commentators point out that that the movement of the play is
about =
> leaving off self-deceptions in a world of enclosed artificiality to =
> enter into wider perspective of reality. Of course, this is a =
> fundamental narrative pattern, and since in its philosophical form as
=
> "gnosis" this is what "Aegypt" is all about I can't really argue that
=
> Crowley is drawing particularly upon this. But it's certainly more =
> advanced than what one would expect to find in a comedy. And that it
is =
> a comedy is important, with its connotations of spring time and the =
> pastoral. In his treatment of Blackbury Jambs and the Faraway Hills it
=
> is evident that Crowley is imbuing these locations with the qualities
of =
> Elizabethan pastoral. LLL for a pastoral comedy has an advanced
quality =
> of knowingness, where the obvious literary artificiality of its plot
and =
> the characters conceptions of themselves is transcended by
acknowledging =
> genuine mortification and introducing a cyclicality into the lives of
=
> its protagonists - the vows that lead to farce repeat themself as, if
=
> not tragedy, then as an experience of some pain - tying its =
> protagonists' development into the forthcoming year with a more =
> complicated and emotionally resonant reality. In his final lecture, =
> Crowley uses Barr to make it quite explicit that he is drawing upon =
> Elizabethan storytelling techniques of repetition to induce meaning.
Of =
> all Shakespeare's plays, LLL has probably the least action - it is a =
> comedy of contemplation in set pieces progressing by its protagonists
=
> appearances and reappearances in different but very formal
combinations. =
> We know from "Novelty" Crowley conceives of "Aegypt" in terms
influenced =
> by "Euphes" (LLL is certainly a satire on Euphuism), and indeed
without =
> its very formal elements of themes, scenes, characters and their =
> thoughts repeating the whole novel would be impenetrable.
>
> Finally, the last third of the play revolves around how each of the =
> suitors is fooled into wooing the wrong woman. The breaking of their =
> vows and quibbling over their consciences is made rather ridiculous
when =
> they are fooled into making suits to the wrong women, although there
is =
> still pathos in their predicament. Just as Pierce's debates of =
> conscience are still valid even though he has confused the two Roses.
=
> And the play ends uncertain as to whether the suitors will win their =
> women.
>
> II
>
> Let's look at the only obvious Crowley makes of LLL. Kraft's =
> autobiography is titled "Sit Down, Sorrow" later in the book we are =
> given the actual passage in LLL from which it originates:
>
> "Welcome the sour cup of prosperity!=20
> Affliction may one day smile again: and until then,=20
> Sit down, sorrow."
>
> However, this is wrong. The proper quote , in its fullness, should be:
>
> "I suffer for the truth, sir: for true it is I was taken with =
> Jaquenetta, and Jaquenetta is a true girl; and therefore welcome the =
> sour cup of prosperity! Affliction may one day smile again; and till =
> then, sit THEE down, sorrow." - act I, sc.1, the final speech, since =
> line numbering varies for prose. (CAPS - my own)
>
> So: the original passage is prose and the quotation is wrong. The only
=
> instance I can find of "Sit down, sorrow" is accompanied by the same =
> cod-versification, and it is here: =
> http://www.johndee.org/charlotte/Chapter14/14p1.html as an epigraph
used =
> in Charlotte Fell Smith's "John Dee" (1909). The assumption we may
make =
> is that in his researches Kraft/Crowley has taken this particular
quote =
> from this particular biography of Dee, where this particular chapter =
> relates Dee's and Talbot's time in Bohemia. Of course it may be
Crowley =
> and Smith are using the same edition of LLL, but a quick browse
through =
> various editions and their editorial commentary in my local library =
> (which holds a lot of reserve stock for the RSC) didn't turn up a
single =
> instance of this particular version.
>
> III
>
> One of the foundations of LLL criticism is that the character of =
> "Holofernes" represents John Florio, and since then other characters
and =
> dialogue have been identified as various Elizabethan notables and =
> touching upon current events with the entire play as a satire on the =
> school of Walter Raleigh. In particular, the play is a locus for
people =
> trying to connect Shakespeare to Giordano Bruno. Florio was an
associate =
> of Bruno's when he was in England and the character of "Berowne" has =
> often been identified as being in some degree based upon Bruno - the =
> extensive use of celestial imagery, the celebration of a vivifying =
> divine love, the extensive use of eye and visualisation imagery that
may =
> be derived from Bruno's art of Memory. Personally, I think this is all
=
> extremely tenuous at best - given that Francis A. Yates wrote a study
of =
> LLL I'm sure that she has at some point examined these connections and
=
> come to a more definitive conclusion - but the point is not whether it
=
> is true, accurate, or even faintly provable but that this series of =
> Bruno-LLL associations is sufficiently long-standing to merit =
> consideration and therefore have influence.
>
> How convincing any of the above is is debatable, but I thought it was
=
> interesting how on even brief examination LLL kept touching upon =
> important scenes, themes and characters in "Aegypt" and vice versa.
>
> Matthew Davis
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C13F97.C133E5E0
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4207.2601" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT size=3D2>
> <P>I know this is primarily a space for discussion of Gene Wolfe, but
=
> since John=20
> Crowley does seem to pop up quite regularly I though it might be a =
> worthwhile=20
> space to test out the observations below. I don’t know if anyone
=
> else has=20
> discussed the relationship of "Love’s Labour’s Lost" to
John =
> Crowley’s "Aegypt"=20
> – it seems obvious to me but I haven’t seen it mentioned
in =
> any of the reviews=20
> or essays - so if all of the below is well known then I apologise for
=
> wasting=20
> your time.</P>
> <P>On the surface, Crowley’s only use of LLL is for the title of
=
> Kraft’s=20
> autobiography and to acknowledge the origins of that title. This all =
> occurs=20
> within the consciousness of Rosie, and the only things they evoke for
=
> her are=20
> own depression, forlornness and sense of solitude. If you didn’t
=
> otherwise know=20
> you might think LLL is a tragedy, from such a deliberate misreading of
=
> what is=20
> actually a comedy. Although a comedy that is almost very nearly a =
> problem=20
> play.</P>
> <P>I</P>
> <P>If we look at the plot, we can see a use similar to that Crowley =
> makes of=20
> "the Solitudes" as an organising principle: a group of
scholars/knights =
> retreat=20
> from the world, makes vows of celibacy and forswear love so that they
=
> may=20
> concentrate on their studies that will bring them fame and triumph
over =
> death=20
> and time. Of course the real world breaks in upon when they fall in =
> love, and=20
> their experience at the hands of the objects of their desire leaves
them =
>
> compromised and their vaunted intellectualism humiliated. Sounds a =
> little like=20
> Pierce, yes? Most commentators point out that that the movement of the
=
> play is=20
> about leaving off self-deceptions in a world of enclosed artificiality
=
> to enter=20
> into wider perspective of reality. Of course, this is a fundamental =
> narrative=20
> pattern, and since in its philosophical form as "gnosis" this is what
=
> "Aegypt"=20
> is all about I can’t really argue that Crowley is drawing =
> particularly upon=20
> this. But it’s certainly more advanced than what one would
expect =
> to find in a=20
> comedy. And that it is a comedy is important, with its connotations of
=
> spring=20
> time and the pastoral. In his treatment of Blackbury Jambs and the =
> Faraway Hills=20
> it is evident that Crowley is imbuing these locations with the
qualities =
> of=20
> Elizabethan pastoral. LLL for a pastoral comedy has an advanced
quality =
> of=20
> knowingness, where the obvious literary artificiality of its plot and
=
> the=20
> characters conceptions of themselves is transcended by acknowledging =
> genuine=20
> mortification and introducing a cyclicality into the lives of its =
> protagonists –=20
> the vows that lead to farce repeat themself as, if not tragedy, then
as =
> an=20
> experience of some pain – tying its protagonists’ =
> development into the=20
> forthcoming year with a more complicated and emotionally resonant =
> reality. In=20
> his final lecture, Crowley uses Barr to make it quite explicit that he
=
> is=20
> drawing upon Elizabethan storytelling techniques of repetition to
induce =
>
> meaning. Of all Shakespeare’s plays, LLL has probably the least
=
> action – it is a=20
> comedy of contemplation in set pieces progressing by its
protagonists=20
> appearances and reappearances in different but very formal
combinations. =
> We know=20
> from "Novelty" Crowley conceives of "Aegypt" in terms influenced by =
> "Euphes"=20
> (LLL is certainly a satire on Euphuism), and indeed without its very =
> formal=20
> elements of themes, scenes, characters and their thoughts repeating
the =
> whole=20
> novel would be impenetrable.</P>
> <P>Finally, the last third of the play revolves around how each of the
=
> suitors=20
> is fooled into wooing the wrong woman. The breaking of their vows and
=
> quibbling=20
> over their consciences is made rather ridiculous when they are fooled
=
> into=20
> making suits to the wrong women, although there is still pathos in
their =
>
> predicament. Just as Pierce’s debates of conscience are still =
> valid even though=20
> he has confused the two Roses. And the play ends uncertain as to
whether =
> the=20
> suitors will win their women.</P>
> <P>II</P>
> <P>Let’s look at the only obvious Crowley makes of LLL. =
> Kraft’s autobiography is=20
> titled "Sit Down, Sorrow" later in the book we are given the actual =
> passage in=20
> LLL from which it originates:</P>
> <P>"Welcome the sour cup of prosperity! <BR>Affliction may one day
smile =
> again:=20
> and until then, <BR>Sit down, sorrow."</P>
> <P>However, this is wrong. The proper quote , in its fullness, should
=
> be:</P>
> <P>"I suffer for the truth, sir: for true it is I was taken with =
> Jaquenetta, and=20
> Jaquenetta is a true girl; and therefore welcome the sour cup of =
> prosperity!=20
> Affliction may one day smile again; and till then, sit THEE down, =
> sorrow." – act=20
> I, sc.1, the final speech, since line numbering varies for prose.
(CAPS =
> – my=20
> own)</P>
> <P>So: the original passage is prose and the quotation is wrong. The =
> only=20
> instance I can find of "Sit down, sorrow" is accompanied by the
same=20
> cod-versification, and it is here: </FONT><A=20
> href=3D"http://www.johndee.org/charlotte/Chapter14/14p1.html"><FONT=20
>
size=3D2>http://www.johndee.org/charlotte/Chapter14/14p1.html</FONT></A>
<=
> FONT=20
> size=3D2> as an epigraph used in Charlotte Fell Smith’s "John
Dee" =
> (1909). The=20
> assumption we may make is that in his researches Kraft/Crowley has
taken =
> this=20
> particular quote from this particular biography of Dee, where this =
> particular=20
> chapter relates Dee’s and Talbot’s time in Bohemia. Of =
> course it may be Crowley=20
> and Smith are using the same edition of LLL, but a quick browse
through =
> various=20
> editions and their editorial commentary in my local library (which
holds =
> a lot=20
> of reserve stock for the RSC) didn’t turn up a single instance
of =
> this=20
> particular version.</P>
> <P>III</P>
> <P>One of the foundations of LLL criticism is that the character of =
> "Holofernes"=20
> represents John Florio, and since then other characters and dialogue =
> have been=20
> identified as various Elizabethan notables and touching upon current =
> events with=20
> the entire play as a satire on the school of Walter Raleigh. In =
> particular, the=20
> play is a locus for people trying to connect Shakespeare to Giordano =
> Bruno.=20
> Florio was an associate of Bruno’s when he was in England and
the =
> character of=20
> "Berowne" has often been identified as being in some degree based upon
=
> Bruno –=20
> the extensive use of celestial imagery, the celebration of a vivifying
=
> divine=20
> love, the extensive use of eye and visualisation imagery that may be =
> derived=20
> from Bruno’s art of Memory. Personally, I think this is all =
> extremely tenuous at=20
> best - given that Francis A. Yates wrote a study of LLL I’m sure
=
> that she has at=20
> some point examined these connections and come to a more definitive =
> conclusion –=20
> but the point is not whether it is true, accurate, or even faintly =
> provable but=20
> that this series of Bruno-LLL associations is sufficiently
long-standing =
> to=20
> merit consideration and therefore have influence.</P>
> <P>How convincing any of the above is is debatable, but I thought it
was =
>
> interesting how on even brief examination LLL kept touching upon =
> important=20
> scenes, themes and characters in "Aegypt" and vice versa.</P>
> <P>Matthew Davis</P></FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C13F97.C133E5E0--
>
>
>
> --------------- MESSAGE urth.v030.n185.2 ---------------
>
> From: James Jordan <jbjordan4@home.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) In Glory Like Their Star (SPOILERS) F&SF Mag story
> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 12:24:17 -0500
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
> In-Reply-To: <200109010031.f810VRc48532@lists1.ba.best.com>
>
> Only one thought, and it's probably wrong:
>
> At 07:28 PM 8/31/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >Just read this in the Oct/Nov issue of Fantasy & Science Fiction
magazine I
> >got in the mail yesterday. Always excited to see a new Wolfe story
> >anywhere.
> >
> >Once again the more Wolfe stories that come out the less chance there
is of
> >me *thinking* I fully understand them. I doubt I've had that feeling
since
> >the early 80s.
> >
> >S
> >P
> >O
> >I
> >L
> >E
> >R
> >
> >S
> >P
> >A
> >C
> >E
> >
> >
> >I felt shock when within the first page I had figured out that this
was a
> >story of aliens (misinterpreted as gods) visiting earth, so I knew
Gene was
> >giving that away and the real mysteries were to come.
> >
> >And once again I have mostly questions that I hope others here can
shed
> >light on for me (smile).
> >
> >1. Any idea what the passage on p.110 means? "Our long voyage
through
> >space impressed them. I doubt they grasped its length, for their
concepts
> >of the five they call "time" are muddled, and so eroneous that they
cannot
> >be termed primitive with any precision. They will be primitive,
perhaps,
> >when the sunlight reaches them on this place."
> >
> >I don't understand the word "five" compared to time.
> >
> >I don't understand where this place that sunlight will reach is to
try to
> >determine when he things earthlings will reach primitive status.
>
> The light from his own home sun, which he has outrun? Or are
we in
> a nuclear winter?
>
>
> >2. What is the deal about the earth not being a sphere because the
desert
> >is a flat spot where gravity works differently? Is the desert the
> >mysterious hidden "Eden" man is still searching for? Something on a
> >different plane where gravity, time, etc. work differently that the
alien
> >could see but man can't?
>
> Is the "flat" area the site of a nuclear detonation?
>
> Nutria
>
>
>
> --------------- END urth.v030.n185 ---------------
>
>
other works
> *More Wolfe info & archive of this list at
http://www.urth.net/urth/
ranjit@moonmilk.com
whorl@lists.best.com
>
*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/
<--prev V30 next-->