Jlawrence’s Comments (group member since Mar 08, 2010)

Jlawrence’s comments from the The Sword and Laser group.

Jared wrote: "Shadow - part two of the audiobook, chapter 16
--------------------



A rocket ship takes off in the previous chapter when Severian and Dorcis are walking and glance back at the city, which also launches into a discussion on symbolism... "

I had remembered that as kind of a city (I think because of the "flying mountain" phrase) floating above them that disappeared in wink, but you're right, it's described as a single "building with towers and buttresses and an arched roof" with "crimson light" pouring from its windows that disappears in a "cascade of sparks" (and Dorcas saw it "leap").

It's an interesting friction in Severian's perception that he sees it as a strange vision instead of a rocket, since from the other quotes above it's clear that he understands his tower was a rocket ship and that he understands what rocket ships do (and in some passage in Shadow even longs for his society to return to mastery of space flight). It could simply be that he was still unprepared to see a rocket in action even though he understands what they are intellectually. But it's definitely appropriate that their conversation turns to symbolism and how Dorcas says that the first level of meaning, the practical/literal, "which ought to be the easiest", is actually the hardest.

Shadow ends on a cliffhanger of panic and violence at the Gate of Nessus.

When Claw starts, not only does it not pick up where Shadow ended, it starts with a dream Severian's having to make things even more disorienting. True, some aspects of the dream seem to reference what else happened at the Gate -- soldiers on horseback blocking the crowd, Dorcas being separated from Severian -- but then the deceased Master Malrubius appears -- so are the other elements in the dream any more substantial?

When Severian wakes we learn he is outside of Nessus, in the village of Saltus, and with Jonas, but Severian is not forthcoming with any of the events that occurred between Shadow's ending and the present.

I think this is likely the most jarring turn in any of the books. In fact, a friend of mine who really got into Shadow was so turned off by this narrative gap that he decided not to read the rest of Claw.

I suspect it's no coincidence that Severian, in the third-to-last chapter of Shadow, holds forth on the art of writing, its conventions, and how pleasing different members of a reading audience has similarities with pleasing different members of the audience of an execution -- and then this first chapter of Claw begins in a very unconventional, audience-expectation-defying way. Other than that, I have no theory about it (yet).

The literary critic Robert Borski has a very convoluted theory about this narrative gap, but it brims with so many spoilers that I've decided to not read it until I've finished re-reading all four New Sun books.

In Lexicon Urthus, Andre-Driussi has an entry on 'Mysteries' where he lists a number of questions he considers useful to think about as you read or re-read New Sun (some of these questions are spoilery in themselves). One of these questions is, "What was the commotion at the gates of Nessus all about?" -- suggesting he does think the answer lies in the books. We've seen in the Unreliable Narrator thread that Severian has omitted things before.

I think there's two related questions:

- What was the commotion at the gates of Nessus all about?

- Why does Severian omit or obscure what happened between the end of Shadow and the start of Claw?

Tamahome wrote: "I heard somewhere they were sections of a space ship?"

Tamahome, that makes me think of this:


(Battlestar Galactica)

and this:


(Silent Running)

I like the idea that just as the Fish forms slowly in the mirrors, Severian and Agia may only appear slowly to people in the time they're visiting.

Anyone have a theory why the desert scene is particularly compelling to Severian (why he strongly felt the urge to remain)?

Adrienne wrote: "And along those lines, there was another little instance of unreliability slightly later...

I caught that one, too! Along with the others, it seems to be adding up to a pattern of Severian omitting things that show him more prone to human weaknesses (of both good and bad varieties). Although, the motivation behind the Thecla contradiction that Colin noted seems more complicated than that.

Sean wrote: "As I said in the other thread, there are some legitimate criticisms of gritty fantasy that don't involve political wankery....I want more mature fantasies, but characters who say "fuck" a lot, screw whores, and go Jack Bauer on their enemies are a rather adolescent idea of maturity. N. K. Jemisin's The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms is nowhere near as gritty as A Song of Ice and Fire or The First Law, but it's a far more mature story because it addresses serious issues about the way fantasies worlds are set up that Martin and Abercrombie ignore. "

Well, Adam Whitehead's rejoinder on the Wertzone blog seems to do a good job of separating the objections of "there are no heroes in these modern works (nihilism)" and "there is an overabundance of shallow, sensational 'adult content' in these modern works" that Leo Grin conflates.

Adam brings up what seems to be some good points about Tolkein and Howard having some quite dark comments about civilization and their own heroes, but I agree with some of the commentators there that Adam goes too far in equating dark themes with nihilism. But again, not having read the Conan stories or the Silmarillion, it's hard for me to say -- what do those of you have read either of those think?

Also, I found Song of Ice and Fire to have a pretty consistent and well-done critique of the standard fantasy ideas of chivalry without descending into the kind of sensationalistic nihilism that Grin is ranting about. I guess the excesses of Jeoffery's psychotic and abusive behavior come closest, though.

I haven't read Abercrombie yet, nor even the Silmarillion or Howard, but I'm finding this debate pretty interesting/amusing.

My favorite quote from Abercrombie's blog post:

"Whether or not my own work is nihilism seems to me very arguable, but poison to the reader's mind and culture? Really? If you feel your mind and culture might collapse under the weight of a surprising ending involving an unpleasant wizard, a rubbish king and a couple of swear words, it seems to me you really need to dig them some deeper foundations."

Colin, you're right -- that's quite a big 'new fact' to learn about the time he and Thecla spent together. I just read it on the train home, so I want to quote it:

*** SPOILERS, Shadow, Chapter 29 ***



In Agilus' cell, Agia is pleading for Severian to spare Agilus' life (even though she and Agilus conspired to kill Severian). She throws herself at Severian sexually and at the same time reaches for something in his sabretache - and

"I slapped her wrist, perhaps harder than I should, and she flew at me, clawing for my eyes as Thecla used sometimes to do when she could no longer bear the thoughts of imprisonment and pain."

Then Severian pushes Agia into the wall.

As Larry mentions in the Thecla thread, it suggests Agia was raging against Severian directly while Thecla was raging against her situation. But in any case, you're right, it's another example that makes you wonder what else Severian's omitting, and what else he might let slip out later.

Well, Colin just commented in the unreliable narrator thread about how Severian later offhandedly mentions Agia trying to claw his eyes out in a rage like Thecla would when things got too much for her -- certainly a contradiction of how he had previously represented the time he spent with Thecla. So that casts even more doubt on their relationship's storybook nature.

Colin wrote: "Jlawrence, I am surprised you forgot the transsubstantial meaning.

My two cents with a quote: It does not matter if he is too literal minded for the book...."

Excellent quote! I hadn't reached it yet in my current re-read. Yes, multiple levels, multiple possible interpretations (like the varying interpretations of the parable of Ymar that Severian contemplates in chapter 17). But I agree that the literal level is *not* inferior to the other levels. That the literal level is so rich and compelling on its own is one of the things that makes the New Sun work so well.

Colin wrote: "PS: As an aside, my initial rant was quite cathartic. I have since devoured Shadow, and enjoyed it thoroughly. I plan on tucking in to Claw tomorrow. All my issues with Wolfe's writing style are resolved and I am able to enjoy it for what it has now become."

That's great! I'm glad you ended up getting into it.

The Lexicon Urthus entry on 'specula' -- Inire's magical/scientific mirrors -- reveals the inspiration for the spectral Fish Inire is able to summon with the mirrors:

"Myth: the fauna of mirrors is a Chinese notion that goes back to the legendary times of the Yellow Emperor. Originally the world of mirrors and the world of men were not divided, nor were they identical, and one could freely travel between the two. For reasons unknown, the mirror people invaded the earth one night, but after a terrible war the Yellow Emperor was able to triumph over them. He imprisoned them in their mirrors and forced them to slavishly repeat all the actions of men. However, they will one day break loose again.

'The first to awaken will be the Fish....Later on, other shapes will begin to stir....They will break through the barriers of glass or metal and this time they will not be defeated. Side by side with these mirror creatures, the creatures of water will join the battle.' (Borges, The Book of Imaginary Beings, 68)."

I couldn't make heads or tails of the scene in the jungle hut in the Botanical Gardens the first time I read Shadow. Now, with the help of Lexicon Urthus, I have a partial theory:

Before the climb up to the hut, Severian repeats Father Inire's lecture about how the mirrors and light are used to allow travel through hyperspace - shortcuts that allow travel between stars. The glass panes of the Botanical garden seem similar to Inire's mirrors. The jungle display is meant to re-create the past, but perhaps instead it allows actual time travel (hyperspace travel through time instead of space?).

The couple in the hut are Christian missionaries (the Christian God is renamed 'the Compassionating', but the passage the woman is reading is the Old Testament Jehovah showing Moses the Promised Land when Moses was on Mt. Nebo), the naked man a local tribesman they are trying to convert, the flier Severian sees out the window is clearly a propeller plane ('the mail plane') from roughly our time period, etc.

But if so -

* How much of the Jungle Garden is the actual past? Just the hut, or more? Agia suggested they would not find the hut there if they went back.

* Why do only the male missionary and the tribesman see Severian and Agia?

* Given the repeated mentions of people who linger too long in a particular Garden feeling drawn to staying there and their minds being warped to conform to the place, could the inhabitants of the hut actually be contemporary Urthians who have taken on the roles of people from the past?

Jared wrote: "IMO the way he (retells that he) acts in certain situations doesnt seem to match how one would act if they felt the way he says he did (huh?)- You dont beat and torture someone you love. Mostly. "

I see what you're getting at, but in Thecla's case I think that's a little unfair, as he was genuinely torn between the Guild that had raised, supported and trained him his entire life, and this woman he had actually, IMO, come to care for. And he *did* end up betraying the Guild for her.

Jared wrote, "Its not unreasonable to suppose that Severian's love for Thecla and indeed 'all the other women' has evolved over time, and that is reflected in his retelling. "

That's a really interesting idea -- I'll be considering that as I continue the re-read.

Lepton, we seem unable to convince you that something can have *more than one use* in a work of fiction -- a literal one, *and* a symbolic one -- so I will no longer try. But if you want to re-read my posts were I stressed that point (that it IS sensible and consistent Latin, but *also* something else), please do. ;)

What do you think of Severian's relationship with Thecla as client, and his betrayal of the guild in order to show her some mercy?

When I originally read these books ten years ago, this was one of the most moving elements, and really helped humanize Severian as a character.

This time, I still find it haunting (especially the torture scene), but I also found the amount of time the book spends showing their relationship to be much shorter than I remembered. Maybe this is a case of knowing what's going to happen effecting the reading.

I also noticed this time that in chapter 16, when he is supposedly obsessed with grief for Thecla, he also falls instantly in love with Agia, and not really in a 'latching on to someone out of desperate grief' way, so that lessened some of the tragedy's impact for me as well.

I know that Severian is not through thinking about Thecla, but these are my initial reactions at this point of my re-read.

What do you think?

Shadow, chapters 12 & 13
-------------------------




More of the-tower-is-a-rocket. When the Revolutionary is used on Thecla, Severain mentions "for a few moments, the ancient engine of the tower lived again." Master Gurloes speaks of the electricity it uses as "lightning."

When he visits the top chamber of the tower right before his exile, it's clearly a cockpit: "Then higher still to the room of the glass roof, with its gray screens and strangely contorted chairs..." And there's mention of "unseen mouths" speaking from other towers - the old communications systems.

It's funny how it's so clear now as I'm looking for these puzzle pieces, but I think of *all* the examples I've listed so far the only things that really registered the first time I read these books were the mention of the moon (but it just seemed strange to me) and the obvious use of electricity to power the Revolutionary. I actually remember thinking at the time that electricity just seemed out of place, that Wolfe hadn't laid any groundwork for its introduction in the story, though now it's clear to me that he had.

Well the biggest example of symbols as a theme is that quote from Chapter 1:

"We believe we invent symbols. The truth is they invent us; we are their creatures, shaped by their hard, defining edges. When soldiers take their oath they are given a coin, an asimi stamped with the profile of the Autarch. Their acceptance of that coin is an acceptance of the special duties and burdens of military life - they are soliders from that moment, thought they may know nothing of management of arms. I did not know that then, but it is profound mistake to believe that we must know of such things to be influenced by them, and in fact to believe so is to believe in the most debased and superstitious kind of magic. The would-be sorcerer alone has faith in the efficacy of pure knowledge; rational people know that things act of themselves or not at all."

There's some discussion of it in the You've Got Your Science Fiction in My Fantasy! (gradual spoilers) thread. a summary of Sean's interpretation: the passage reveals part of Severain's world-view -- he believes that symbols exist independently of culture and act on people independently (which Sean says is basically a belief in magic). Likewise Severian thinks that a person who believes in the "efficacy in pure knowledge" (ie, someone with an scientific outlook, who would analyze the coin-symbol as a creation of human culture) is a bebased "would-be sorcerer."

But the passage, as well as revealing some superstition/mysticism in Severian's thought, also has some truth to it -- "it is profound mistake to believe that we must know of such things to be influenced by them" is true in that Urth's inhabitants are constantly effected by technology they no longer understand.

Other themes so far:

Memory -- Severain has a photographic memory but also is a unreliable narrator. Likewise, his society has some-mixed memories of its history and achievements. This ties into:

Identity -- Personal and cultural identity is based on memory. Identity gets played with in many ways in the books.

Storytelling -- Encapsulating all of this is the theme of storytelling, and how stories can reveal or distort memory and identity.

Colin wrote: "Having said that, my biggest problem is Severian's voice. He speaks and sounds like he is an Emperor or high noble. Maybe he is, I haven't got that far yet. However, from what i've observed about the Torturers, they are not the highest pinnacle of society, nor are their members schooled in grammar every waking moment of their lives."

Well, I'll just say that he has told us the social position he holds (at the time he's recounting this tale) at the end of Chapter 1:

"It was in this fashion that I began the long journey by which I have backed into the throne."

Damn, these songs are spoiler-y, just to warn new readers. ;)

Hey, I have the same keyboard as the guy in the 2nd video.

Haha, good lord!

The clock-wise video swipe with the sword was the best...

Noel wrote: "Thanks, between your replies here and your comments on the book that I've just listened to on the latest podcast, you have done the impossible and have made me seriously consider digging out my decades old copies of this book and giving them another try. Perhaps my older self will appreciate them more."

That's great, Noel! Maybe Wolfe's prose will still rub you the wrong way, but I hope instead you end up getting into the books this time.

I also realized the first two sentences of the passage we've been discussing were not included in Sean's quote - they give some extra clarity to the untangling we've attempted here: "We believe that we invent symbols. The truth is they invent us; we are their creatures, shaped by their hard, defining edges." He then goes on to describe the symbol of accepting the coin as swearing loyalty and the rest quoted above.

I think it also helps to always view such asides as being more revealing of *Severian's* thoughts than Wolfe's. Wolfe likely disagrees with Severian on a number of things. ;)

Jared wrote: " 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. " - and perhaps any sufficiently defunct technology is indistinguishable from magic. "

In the podcast, Tom rephrased the Clarke quote to apply to the New Sun -- something along the lines of "To any sufficiently regressed society, its own technology is indistinguishable from magic."