From: Spectacled Bear <email@example.com> Subject: Re: (whorl) a personal tangent in praise of Gene Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 10:10:21 +0000 At 06:23 2002-01-09, maa32 wrote: ... >I think >that there was a ton more to The Book of the Short Sun than any of us have as >yet realized, and I think it is one of his greatest creations, whether I'm >wrong about my individual theories or not. I think he's gotten a bad rap by a >lot of people on this one, and that his talents exceed understanding and >especially exceed SIMPLIFICATION. That's certainly true. There appear to be so many loose ends, like the whole business of who the Mother is and what she intends, and the link between her and the Scylla on Urth. Someone on this list once said that you know you're starting to understand a Wolfe book when the ending feels like an ending and not just an abrupt halt in the narrative, and that was spot on. There's a real feeling of all those plot points joining up to form a solid arc of story, if that makes any sense. ... >(whatever happened to Borski? He had great ideas comparable in obscurity to >most of mine, often with as little textual evidence as I have, too!) And - why do we never see the two of you at the same time? Actually, I think you are on firmer ground, mostly. All the things about trees and plant genetics and the repeated motifs like the salt and the wall are very telling; they must mean *something*, because that's how things work with Wolfe. And the speculation about Horn and Babbie too - that was always one of the most mystifying passages. Whether your theories are right or not, you have certainly found some very interesting things to think about and debate. Thanks! Spectacled Bear.