0:05 Introduction 1:26 Let’s look at some Criticism of the book 4:00 Remember to ask yourself, “Is this true” ? 9 rules to reading Wolfe 7:46 *Wolfe’s Biography* (Upbringing, Texas A&M, Korean War, Engineering/Pringles, Editor, Novelist, Loss of Vision and his wife) 14:30 He believes in Free will and original sin. He was a convert. He is ok with being looked down upon by inborn Christians. 16:16 *Fantasy, Sci-Fi, and Realistic Fiction* 19:42, 24:04 The world Wolfe creates 32:00 Violence and punishment 35:46 *Philosophical Themes* (1) Identity/Coming of Age (38:22) Having others inside of you (38:45) 39:42 Wolfe’s problem with guilt. “A Crisis of Conciousness.” 43:55 Three Kinds of Religions/three paths to God. 46:17 Camera dies, audio continues (2) How do we make sense of the Future culture (47:23). Focus on language Totalitarian Society (53:21) Cicero, on the Nature of the Gods (1:00:13) (3)The Inescapable Social Organization in Politics (1:01:00) - Autocracy -Guilds (4) Love (1:03:35) Erotic for a person or a friend or a comrade. Maybe affection? 1:07:21 Military/Boarding Schools 1:13:32 Catholic Academia 1:18:30 How much is necessary to deem someone unreliable? 1:20:35 End
One of the students in the class here mentions the fact that the torturer apprentices are taught that women were banned from serving the guild because they were too cruel. This is an example of what makes Wolfe's writing so great. He doesn't spell it out to you but he invites you to question everything. Why are the apprentices taught this? It's a mistake to take it at face value that this is, in fact, why women were banned. But it's a story (and may be a necessary lie) that could accomplish a number of important things, especially if it is that kind of lie where the exact opposite was the case.
I guessed the real reason was the torturers were becoming too politically important. Another tenant is torturers aren't supposed to listen to the clients. Clearly they were hearing and using or selling this information at one point.
The thing I remember before I read that series is how hated it was by sci/fi - fantasy fans, & yet when I read those books I found myself savoring it's contents. I'm glad I didn't listen to those critics on that occasion.
@@angellover02171 I read it that they are taught women are too cruel precisely because women, in general, weren't cruel enough. The story begins with Severian making a huge commitment based on nothing more than a 'heart shaped face' in the dark graveyard. Men are too easily influenced by women. The guild cannot work with women present because they aren't cruel enough and can't work without them if it's known they are absent because they aren't cruel enough. Either way, men's cruelty is tempered by the lack of cruelty in women. And conversely the cruelty is enhanced if it's believed women are even crueler.
I just discovered this channel. Thank you for sharing these lectures. I have been a longtime fan of Wolfe and especially Jack Vance, so I will be watching that one next.
Apparently Wolfe had written the entire 'TBOTNS' before the first novel was published. The publishers did not want to release the entire work as a single volume at once. Wolfe was also asked to provide cliff-hanger endings to each of the first 3 separate novels, which he resented. That is why the following novel jumps ahead in time and doesn't immediately address the previous novel's ending.
I really have been enjoying this conversation. I was introduced to the book when I was in the Navy attending electronics school in Florida. I went to the store with a friend that was going to Walden Books in Florida. My friend mentioned this book to me. I distinctly remember the strange cover of the "The Claw of the Conciliator". This was the only book of the three that had read and didn't find out about the trilogy years later. I have since read and reread the trilogy three times. A fascinating book.
As a reader I pay active attention whenever I read, but there are entire aspects of this book that I completely missed (based on comments I've read and heard since reading it). And that was based on already knowing a fair amount about the book's and Wolfe's reputation. There were other aspects I did realise were 'in play', but I did not know how exactly Wolfe intended them to be interpreted. Wolfe does (to be fair) make it clear at times what is important and provides some assistance. The problem is that there is no way of knowing for sure if you've reached the right interpretation or not of each element.
Heck, the first two or three times I read through the series I didn't even realize that Severian died and was resurrected in the very first chapter, even though it's right there in the chapter title "death and resurrection". He dies and is resurrected about 7 times throughout the entire series from what I remember.
About Wolfe not "sticking the landing" in *Citadel*: I remember one of the principals (I think it was Wolfe himself) saying that his editor wanted an additional paragraph to the book (speculation: Maybe more detail about how Severian brought about the new sun?). Wolfe said that, instead, that he'd write an additional novel. This led to *Urth*.
I know you commented this long ago, but I hope you stuck with it and finished all of the "solar cycle" series. IMO the books get better and better. If you feel like something is not relevant and you want to drop the book, keep reading. it all comes together, don't spoil any major plot points for yourself if possible. Enjoy!
Gregory, aside from igniting my love for Philosophy, I really LOVE this series. And there would be so much more to say about some of these, I'd love you expanding some! (Gene Wolfe for one is so rich with philosophy and I think you didn't get around to all you had to say :))
Expansion - meaning going back to a series - would be possible perhaps down the line. Notice that I haven't done that with any author's series at this point
@@GregoryBSadler There are too many to cover, right! I just can't get enough of this series and I want to thank you for introducing me to Gene Wolfe. I really enjoy Lovecraft and Gene has a similar way of doing things. These guys take a lot of time to digest - in a good way :)
Philip K. Dick and talking doors: see also "I See a Man Sitting on a Chair, and the Chair Is Biting His Leg", a short story by Robert Sheckley and Harlan Ellison. It's in Ellison's book "Partners in Wonder". It is, in a way, very phildickian.
24:19 Sadler asks about the world-building of Gene Wolfe in Book of the New Sun. Whether or not Wolfe was able to develop a model of the Book of the New Sun world, it does seem like a consistent world throughout. Later in Urth of the New Sun, there is a consistency of several of the characters that, even if it isn't a product of fore-thought, does not feel to be tacked on.
In answer to the 'Speculative Fiction' question - I always figured that the question was 'what if?' and therefore, things like alternate history and dying earth etc. automatically fall under this category because "what if history turned out this way, what if the earth was dying?" I guess in some regard you could house most all of fiction under this as usually writing is some form of exercise of 'what if this person was up against these circumstances or encountered this behavior from this type of character?" and that's largely 'the depth.' It seemed like you had some reticence to this interpretation of the genre as well. I'll have to think on this more but am open to discussion as well. Good stuff, Dr. Sadler.
Severian is ABSOLUTELY an unreliable narrator. All Wolfe's narrators are. That's kind of his thing. I can't remember what interview it was, but basically Wolfe has said that Severian is unreliable but never outright lies to the reader, and I get the sense that the challenge of making a narrator that doesn't tell outright lies and has a perfect memory unreliable was something that appealed to him. The first way is a way in which most wolfe narrators are unreliable, which is that they are written like real people, something very rare in scifi/fantasy. This means that if something is mundane to Severian, he's not going to explain it to you, because he doesn't know that he should. He doesn't know what you know. If you were writing a memoir, would you explain what a car is and how it functions? Of course not, you would assume anybody reading would know what a car is, not that somebody in the far past is scratching their head at your lack of detail. This simple fact accounts for much of the perceived difficulty curve in Wolfe's books, imo. The second way is that Severian will lie by omission, usually when confronted with something he has trouble dealing with. Things like sleeping with Thecla. If you pay close attention you'll notice he never outright says he didn't sleep with her, but he skillfully distracts you and glides past it, and he almost always works up the courage to admit it later (much like he admits that he "perhaps," raped Jolenta). The third way is that Severian almost chronically misunderstands people and misjudges their character and motive. He was wrong about Talos being in charge, he was wrong about Dorcas being innocent and sheltered, he was wrong about Jonas being human, etc. If you take Severian's conclusions about other people as gospel you will be just as wrong as he is, which is most of the time. The fourth way is that Severian is, quite simply, not himself. By the end we realize he has thousands of people's memories and personalities in him, and that this conglomerate human has been our narrator the entire time. We have never met the real little boy from the first book. This colors the entire story because he no longer has perspective on himself. As Patricia McKillip so eloquently states:"“Easier to understand the wind . . . Easier to walk on the surface of the frothing sea, than to remember the hunger to do it. Easier to remember knowledge than ignorance, experience than innocence. Easier to know what you are than remember what you were." His very vocabulary and language are above the original Severian's level of learning. Thecla talked and thought circles around him during her time in the Citadel, and the reality is he probably seemed more young and naive to others than his after the fact narration makes it appear to us, especially when he doesn't give us word for word dialogue. See above point about chronically misunderstanding people. Severian lacks guile and experience. Perhaps the most interesting way is that Severian claims to have a perfect memory, many, many times. There's plenty of evidence that this is the case, but then there's little niggling details that suggest this can't possibly be the case. For instance, he gets lost often, seemingly unable to remember directions he was told or places he's been before or seen from a high vantage point. Nobody with a perfect memory should get lost as much as he does. The very first time he says he has a perfect memory in the beginning of Shadow he then, just a sentence or two later, gets roche and eata mixed up from what he had said before. So what's the deal? The best theory I've seen is that Severian actually has two memories. A normal, human memory, subject to all the errors of our own, and a psuedo-memory that is a byproduct of his being the new sun and having power over time (as Dorcas theorizes, the Claw heals by manipulating time). By an effort of will he can travel the corridors of time (as he does in a literal, physical sense during Urth of the New Sun) within his own mind and literally relive the past. We see him explicitly enter this trance-like state a handful of times throughout the series, and there's a line tucked away somewhere about him being able to remember other timelines or other Severians or something like that which most people seem to completely gloss over. Minor inconsistencies like whether Roche or Eata opened the gate can perhaps be explained by him using his time travel trance the first time writing it, and simply recalling it normally the second time. He's perhaps even remembering a different, similar, but not identical timeline. The book hints heavily at there having been many iterations of Severian before this one.
Such a great explanation, thank you. You expanded upon many of the same impressions I've had about Severian and Wolfe's masterful use of the unreliable narrator. Within the Soldier series, Latro is presented upfront as unreliable and yet, because he alone can see and talk with the deities and spirits, Latro is in some ways the most reliable viewpoint. Thanks again for so eloquently describing this aspect of Severian.
I think also interest, in the podcast Rereading Wolfe (and I'd be hardpressed to give you concrete examples at this exact moment), they talk about how Severian lies, but that his lies become truths later in the book in ways that the reader may not have expected.
Great writer. He was inspired not just by Jack Vance. But also by Nabokov+Proust+Capote+Le Guin+etc. And you should REread his books to understand them. His books are for "detectives". You must read between the lines. This book is just like John Bunyan "Pilgrim's progress" but with Sci-fi.
You don't consider requiring a second read to understand the text to be an indication of poor writing ability? Or that it's odd to insist readers not just suffer through a book they don't understand, but that they do it again afterwards in the hope that they were just reading it wrong? "Is there a story or concept of any stature" is a good question. I think not. To borrow the door example. If you were presented with an enchanted door that barred your entry and later it was revealed it was an internet of things smart-door that barred your entry, I think you should be asking the question: why are you wasting my time with this? we covered the door. I was promised a quest.
The story you were referring to by PK Dick was Ubik. It's a novel but it's funny you could think of the Toll Door as a little short story and who knows it might have started out that way.
I’m halfway through part 3 at the moment and dying for some related content to dive into. Should I wait until I finish the series to watch this video or is it spoiler-free enough that far into the story? Someone please respond haha
@@GregoryBSadler thanks for the reply man. I figured as much, and I’ll be glad everything was open for discussion on the other end. I’m tempted to go ahead and listen but this series is such a beautiful puzzle, the speculation on the meaning of some pieces is so enjoyable I think I want to experience that first read-through completely clean.
@@GregoryBSadler as a comparable but also very distinct work of literary science fiction concerned (Delaney's case) more with world and the mechanism of world building than any conventional science fiction plot. Also as a very provocative and frequently frustrating work.
Well, not an actual class. But as you know, we do monthly sessions that you can watch the video of followed up by Zoom discussions that you can easily join in
I've had one for quite a few months now. For the time being, I'm just converting some of my shorter lectures to podcasts. Here it is - soundcloud.com/gregorybsadler
Some writers tap into something beyond us and I believe this series did that.
So glad I found this! I will come back to this video once I finish all 4 books
Sounds good
0:05 Introduction
1:26 Let’s look at some Criticism of the book
4:00 Remember to ask yourself, “Is this true” ? 9 rules to reading Wolfe
7:46 *Wolfe’s Biography* (Upbringing, Texas A&M, Korean War, Engineering/Pringles, Editor, Novelist, Loss of Vision and his wife)
14:30 He believes in Free will and original sin. He was a convert. He is ok with being looked down upon by inborn Christians.
16:16 *Fantasy, Sci-Fi, and Realistic Fiction*
19:42, 24:04 The world Wolfe creates
32:00 Violence and punishment
35:46 *Philosophical Themes*
(1) Identity/Coming of Age (38:22)
Having others inside of you (38:45)
39:42 Wolfe’s problem with guilt. “A Crisis of Conciousness.”
43:55 Three Kinds of Religions/three paths to God.
46:17 Camera dies, audio continues
(2) How do we make sense of the Future culture (47:23).
Focus on language
Totalitarian Society (53:21)
Cicero, on the Nature of the Gods (1:00:13)
(3)The Inescapable Social Organization in Politics (1:01:00)
- Autocracy -Guilds
(4) Love (1:03:35) Erotic for a person or a friend or a comrade. Maybe affection?
1:07:21 Military/Boarding Schools
1:13:32 Catholic Academia
1:18:30 How much is necessary to deem someone unreliable?
1:20:35 End
Nice work! Thanks for doing that!
Gregory B. Sadler Glad I could help.
There's just something so relaxing about this lecturer. I love to see people go in depth about what they love.
It's very dreamlike book. I absolutely love it.
This is the only Christmas present I've gotten!
Merry Christmas!
One of the students in the class here mentions the fact that the torturer apprentices are taught that women were banned from serving the guild because they were too cruel. This is an example of what makes Wolfe's writing so great. He doesn't spell it out to you but he invites you to question everything. Why are the apprentices taught this? It's a mistake to take it at face value that this is, in fact, why women were banned. But it's a story (and may be a necessary lie) that could accomplish a number of important things, especially if it is that kind of lie where the exact opposite was the case.
Urth of the New Sun shows you kinda maybe why that happened.
I guessed the real reason was the torturers were becoming too politically important. Another tenant is torturers aren't supposed to listen to the clients. Clearly they were hearing and using or selling this information at one point.
The thing I remember before I read that series is how hated it was by sci/fi - fantasy fans, & yet when I read those books I found myself savoring it's contents.
I'm glad I didn't listen to those critics on that occasion.
@@angellover02171 I read it that they are taught women are too cruel precisely because women, in general, weren't cruel enough. The story begins with Severian making a huge commitment based on nothing more than a 'heart shaped face' in the dark graveyard. Men are too easily influenced by women. The guild cannot work with women present because they aren't cruel enough and can't work without them if it's known they are absent because they aren't cruel enough. Either way, men's cruelty is tempered by the lack of cruelty in women. And conversely the cruelty is enhanced if it's believed women are even crueler.
I just discovered this channel. Thank you for sharing these lectures. I have been a longtime fan of Wolfe and especially Jack Vance, so I will be watching that one next.
Glad you're enjoying the videos
Apparently Wolfe had written the entire 'TBOTNS' before the first novel was published. The publishers did not want to release the entire work as a single volume at once. Wolfe was also asked to provide cliff-hanger endings to each of the first 3 separate novels, which he resented. That is why the following novel jumps ahead in time and doesn't immediately address the previous novel's ending.
Only half true. He wrote it all in *second* draft when The Shadow of the Torturer was published.
great video, its fun seeing so many peoples takes on Gene Wolfe, recently finished BOTNS + Urth. A series that never truly escapes your mind.
Yes, it's quite something
I really have been enjoying this conversation. I was introduced to the book when I was in the Navy attending electronics school in Florida. I went to the store with a friend that was going to Walden Books in Florida. My friend mentioned this book to me. I distinctly remember the strange cover of the "The Claw of the Conciliator". This was the only book of the three that had read and didn't find out about the trilogy years later. I have since read and reread the trilogy three times. A fascinating book.
As a reader I pay active attention whenever I read, but there are entire aspects of this book that I completely missed (based on comments I've read and heard since reading it). And that was based on already knowing a fair amount about the book's and Wolfe's reputation. There were other aspects I did realise were 'in play', but I did not know how exactly Wolfe intended them to be interpreted. Wolfe does (to be fair) make it clear at times what is important and provides some assistance. The problem is that there is no way of knowing for sure if you've reached the right interpretation or not of each element.
That's often the case with great literature - you keep reading and rereading, and keep on finding more there
Heck, the first two or three times I read through the series I didn't even realize that Severian died and was resurrected in the very first chapter, even though it's right there in the chapter title "death and resurrection". He dies and is resurrected about 7 times throughout the entire series from what I remember.
Wolfe was actually in the infantry. He was awarded the CIB in Korea. (RIP Gene Wolfe)
Yes
Speaking as an alumnus of St. John's College, it's always refreshing to hear an unexpected shout-out. Thanks for this great video!
You’re very welcome!
About Wolfe not "sticking the landing" in *Citadel*: I remember one of the principals (I think it was Wolfe himself) saying that his editor wanted an additional paragraph to the book (speculation: Maybe more detail about how Severian brought about the new sun?). Wolfe said that, instead, that he'd write an additional novel. This led to *Urth*.
Interesting
just getting into this series . really enjoyed the discussion on here ! thanks for posting
You're welcome!
I know you commented this long ago, but I hope you stuck with it and finished all of the "solar cycle" series. IMO the books get better and better. If you feel like something is not relevant and you want to drop the book, keep reading. it all comes together, don't spoil any major plot points for yourself if possible. Enjoy!
Novels to read and re-read. The mystery of Severian seems a bit different each time.
Indeed
Gregory, aside from igniting my love for Philosophy, I really LOVE this series. And there would be so much more to say about some of these, I'd love you expanding some! (Gene Wolfe for one is so rich with philosophy and I think you didn't get around to all you had to say :))
Expansion - meaning going back to a series - would be possible perhaps down the line. Notice that I haven't done that with any author's series at this point
@@GregoryBSadler There are too many to cover, right! I just can't get enough of this series and I want to thank you for introducing me to Gene Wolfe. I really enjoy Lovecraft and Gene has a similar way of doing things. These guys take a lot of time to digest - in a good way :)
Philip K. Dick and talking doors: see also "I See a Man Sitting on a Chair, and the Chair Is Biting His Leg", a short story by Robert Sheckley and Harlan Ellison. It's in Ellison's book "Partners in Wonder". It is, in a way, very phildickian.
24:19 Sadler asks about the world-building of Gene Wolfe in Book of the New Sun. Whether or not Wolfe was able to develop a model of the Book of the New Sun world, it does seem like a consistent world throughout. Later in Urth of the New Sun, there is a consistency of several of the characters that, even if it isn't a product of fore-thought, does not feel to be tacked on.
Great title since sol natalis (sol Invictus) was the Roman festival on the 25th.
Totally coincidental in this case
In answer to the 'Speculative Fiction' question - I always figured that the question was 'what if?' and therefore, things like alternate history and dying earth etc. automatically fall under this category because "what if history turned out this way, what if the earth was dying?" I guess in some regard you could house most all of fiction under this as usually writing is some form of exercise of 'what if this person was up against these circumstances or encountered this behavior from this type of character?" and that's largely 'the depth.' It seemed like you had some reticence to this interpretation of the genre as well. I'll have to think on this more but am open to discussion as well. Good stuff, Dr. Sadler.
It turns out, as with most important genres, that any one-line attempt at a definition of it, will be inadequate
@@GregoryBSadler True enough. Thanks for the lectures!
Severian is ABSOLUTELY an unreliable narrator. All Wolfe's narrators are. That's kind of his thing.
I can't remember what interview it was, but basically Wolfe has said that Severian is unreliable but never outright lies to the reader, and I get the sense that the challenge of making a narrator that doesn't tell outright lies and has a perfect memory unreliable was something that appealed to him.
The first way is a way in which most wolfe narrators are unreliable, which is that they are written like real people, something very rare in scifi/fantasy. This means that if something is mundane to Severian, he's not going to explain it to you, because he doesn't know that he should. He doesn't know what you know. If you were writing a memoir, would you explain what a car is and how it functions? Of course not, you would assume anybody reading would know what a car is, not that somebody in the far past is scratching their head at your lack of detail. This simple fact accounts for much of the perceived difficulty curve in Wolfe's books, imo.
The second way is that Severian will lie by omission, usually when confronted with something he has trouble dealing with. Things like sleeping with Thecla. If you pay close attention you'll notice he never outright says he didn't sleep with her, but he skillfully distracts you and glides past it, and he almost always works up the courage to admit it later (much like he admits that he "perhaps," raped Jolenta).
The third way is that Severian almost chronically misunderstands people and misjudges their character and motive. He was wrong about Talos being in charge, he was wrong about Dorcas being innocent and sheltered, he was wrong about Jonas being human, etc. If you take Severian's conclusions about other people as gospel you will be just as wrong as he is, which is most of the time.
The fourth way is that Severian is, quite simply, not himself. By the end we realize he has thousands of people's memories and personalities in him, and that this conglomerate human has been our narrator the entire time. We have never met the real little boy from the first book. This colors the entire story because he no longer has perspective on himself. As Patricia McKillip so eloquently states:"“Easier to understand the wind . . . Easier to walk on the surface of the frothing sea, than to remember the hunger to do it. Easier to remember knowledge than ignorance, experience than innocence. Easier to know what you are than remember what you were."
His very vocabulary and language are above the original Severian's level of learning. Thecla talked and thought circles around him during her time in the Citadel, and the reality is he probably seemed more young and naive to others than his after the fact narration makes it appear to us, especially when he doesn't give us word for word dialogue. See above point about chronically misunderstanding people. Severian lacks guile and experience.
Perhaps the most interesting way is that Severian claims to have a perfect memory, many, many times.
There's plenty of evidence that this is the case, but then there's little niggling details that suggest this can't possibly be the case. For instance, he gets lost often, seemingly unable to remember directions he was told or places he's been before or seen from a high vantage point. Nobody with a perfect memory should get lost as much as he does. The very first time he says he has a perfect memory in the beginning of Shadow he then, just a sentence or two later, gets roche and eata mixed up from what he had said before. So what's the deal?
The best theory I've seen is that Severian actually has two memories. A normal, human memory, subject to all the errors of our own, and a psuedo-memory that is a byproduct of his being the new sun and having power over time (as Dorcas theorizes, the Claw heals by manipulating time). By an effort of will he can travel the corridors of time (as he does in a literal, physical sense during Urth of the New Sun) within his own mind and literally relive the past. We see him explicitly enter this trance-like state a handful of times throughout the series, and there's a line tucked away somewhere about him being able to remember other timelines or other Severians or something like that which most people seem to completely gloss over. Minor inconsistencies like whether Roche or Eata opened the gate can perhaps be explained by him using his time travel trance the first time writing it, and simply recalling it normally the second time. He's perhaps even remembering a different, similar, but not identical timeline. The book hints heavily at there having been many iterations of Severian before this one.
ABSOLUTELY ABSOLUTE!
Such a great explanation, thank you. You expanded upon many of the same impressions I've had about Severian and Wolfe's masterful use of the unreliable narrator. Within the Soldier series, Latro is presented upfront as unreliable and yet, because he alone can see and talk with the deities and spirits, Latro is in some ways the most reliable viewpoint. Thanks again for so eloquently describing this aspect of Severian.
I think also interest, in the podcast Rereading Wolfe (and I'd be hardpressed to give you concrete examples at this exact moment), they talk about how Severian lies, but that his lies become truths later in the book in ways that the reader may not have expected.
Ur comment blew my mind.
But where is it hinted many times that there have been many iterations of Severians?
I never comment on videos but this is a remarkable analysis. Thank you!
Great writer. He was inspired not just by Jack Vance. But also by Nabokov+Proust+Capote+Le Guin+etc.
And you should REread his books to understand them. His books are for "detectives". You must read between the lines. This book is just like John Bunyan "Pilgrim's progress" but with Sci-fi.
Who said he was only inspired by Vance?
You don't consider requiring a second read to understand the text to be an indication of poor writing ability?
Or that it's odd to insist readers not just suffer through a book they don't understand, but that they do it again afterwards in the hope that they were just reading it wrong?
"Is there a story or concept of any stature" is a good question. I think not.
To borrow the door example. If you were presented with an enchanted door that barred your entry and later it was revealed it was an internet of things smart-door that barred your entry, I think you should be asking the question: why are you wasting my time with this? we covered the door. I was promised a quest.
@@AnimeReference I'd say sometimes it is, and sometimes it definitely isn't
shout out to the dude that wept reading book of the short sun
The story you were referring to by PK Dick was Ubik. It's a novel but it's funny you could think of the Toll Door as a little short story and who knows it might have started out that way.
Yes, I've read it many times
Major Big Lebowski vibes from this guy.
Well uh thats just like uh your opinion man
I’m halfway through part 3 at the moment and dying for some related content to dive into. Should I wait until I finish the series to watch this video or is it spoiler-free enough that far into the story? Someone please respond haha
@@GregoryBSadler thanks for the reply man. I figured as much, and I’ll be glad everything was open for discussion on the other end. I’m tempted to go ahead and listen but this series is such a beautiful puzzle, the speculation on the meaning of some pieces is so enjoyable I think I want to experience that first read-through completely clean.
hey Greg, wonder what you might think of Samuel R. Delaney's Dhalgren
I wonder how that's relevant to this video and Wolfe series. Maybe you want to spell that out
@@GregoryBSadler as a comparable but also very distinct work of literary science fiction concerned (Delaney's case) more with world and the mechanism of world building than any conventional science fiction plot. Also as a very provocative and frequently frustrating work.
I would take this class.
Well, not an actual class. But as you know, we do monthly sessions that you can watch the video of followed up by Zoom discussions that you can easily join in
Does this channal have a podcast?
I've had one for quite a few months now. For the time being, I'm just converting some of my shorter lectures to podcasts. Here it is - soundcloud.com/gregorybsadler
ua-cam.com/video/qRvL0gqlyrw/v-deo.html
7:50. "He's a living writer"... Sadly, no longer (as of April 14, 2019.)
Yes. And just one state over from where I live
Im pretty sure the Dick novel was three stigmata
Possibly the case
It was Ubik