From: "Roy C. Lackey" <rclackey@stic.net>
Subject: (urth) Re: Inire's "Mirrors"
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 02:10:11 

Nicholas Gevers wrote:

>>I'm glad to see that my "Fairy Tale Logic" posting
ended our dry patch; I'm also gratified that mantis
agrees with me in part, a rare event. But to take up
the cudgel again: I still contend that Inire's
description of the working of his mirrors is
intentional gibberish on Wolfe's part, to the extent
that he wishes it to be read as gibberish, in contrast
with all the intended-to-be-plausible explanations of
FTL technology in SF. An ideas-driven writer like Poul
Anderson or Isaac Asimov desires his FTL conception to
be believed, to be given the benefit of a very large
doubt; but for a style-driven writer like Jack Vance
or Wolfe, an FTL-exposition is a CONCEIT, a rhetorical
contrivance, serving a metaphorical or humorous
purpose. Inire's mirrors should be interrogated on that basis. <<

    To say nothing of the "white fountain". I would like to see the
scientific explanation for the mating of a man and a larval "angel"
producing an extra-universal remedy for a black hole in a dying sun.

Roy



*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/