From: "James Wynn"
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:25:28 -0600 Andrew explained: One of my problems with Roy's list representing deliberate "errors" is just their triviality - I find it hard to think that most of them could mean anything much. Crush responds: As a believer that the discrepancies are intentional, I see their triviality as exemplary of Wolfe's subtlety in dealing with an unreliable narrator. If the discrepancies had been of weight, then they would have looked to be most likely intentional on Severian's part -- i.e. *lies". Since they are trivial, they can only be errors in memory (assuming they aren't typos). The challenge before advocates of the intentional discrepancies theory is to show that they occur in at least most of the places where Severian asserts a flawless memory. Actually, an easier way to settle the issue is to get Wolfe to answer whether the Drotte-Roche discrepancy is a typo. If he were to say flat out that it is a typo, I would be willing to concede that they probably all are. However, if he meant this one, then Sev's memory *is not* perfect, and the other discrepancies are intentional as well -- and most certainly there are more to be found. If Wolfe were to quibble on the matter even a little, then I think it is safe to presume they were intentional, since he surely would not obfuscate about such a typo any more than he did for the Marble-Mint typos of "The Long Sun". Speaking of which, are these "errors" carried forward into "Shadow and Claw"? -- Crush --