Although Severian says he remembers everything, Wolfe is careful revealing this power. Severian does recall events or people like Howard Cosell. I think, based on interviews I have read with Wolfe, he wanted to provide the reader confidence that the imperfect narratation of the first person was going to be pretty much perfect. Knowing Severian has this power, we trust his recollections. Smart guy, Wolfe.
That's a great observation (and +1 for referencing Howard Cosell). I did not dive into that "imperfect perfect memory" you reference--but it is fascinating to consider Severian as an unreliable narrator--either due to his memory not being as eidetic as he tells us it is, or because he's manipulating us, his readers, by only telling us what he wants to...
I remember a interview with Wolfe in which he discusses using the first person. He said all narration is by definition unreliable. But I don't think Wolfe would double cross us.
I read the Shadow of the Torturer and yes I noticed the structure to be unique. However does that make it good? Not necessarily. The plot unfolds basically without any cause. One example is how Severian just stumbles upon the Claw randomly by driving a chariot into a monastery or something like that.
You are telling me the character just randomly stumbles upon one of the most powerful artifacts? Also the members of the monastery just let him get away with it. Like what? For me the entire book felt like a very long poem that is meant to be analyzed like you are doing right now. If you read it for the plot it is mind numbingly nonsensical and boring.
Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your viewpoint.
No, I definitely do not think "unique = good," and I completely understand why this particular brand of unique would not work for many readers. Maybe even most readers. But here, the structure, plot, and themes manage to coalesce into something greater than their parts, unifying it and deepening it. Not just to please overthinkers and PhDs, but because it works. I myself did not find it boring--challenging, yes, but not boring :)
As for the coincidence you mention regarding the Claw, my sense is Severian was "meant" to have it. In the final book, it seems implied the Pelerines know he has it--and there's more said about even what the Claw "is" (and is not...I won't spoil it here.) Also, Catholic fantasy has a strong sense of what Tolkien calls "eucatastrophe"--miraculous events, seemingly-unrealistic, which lead to joyous, happy endings. These may be pre-ordained by God, active in the world. I'm probably going on a limb here, but much about Severian's gaining and later "use" of the Claw--as well as multiple other events--reminds me of this.
I agree. Chesterton was Wolfe's main influence, after all. I also think the series is loosely based on The Pilgrim's Progress; the similarities are uncanny.
I appreciate your comment. I apologize if I sound aggressive, I just really wanted to like the book. I read it in page and in audiobook at the same time repeating sections to try and grasp it. And even after all that I just had to drop it at the end because it was not giving me anything.
Anyways, I do like the themes of the book. I subscribed to see what other books you recommended!
The book of the new sun is the single finest sci-fi/fantasy ever written.
Although Severian says he remembers everything, Wolfe is careful revealing this power. Severian does recall events or people like Howard Cosell. I think, based on interviews I have read with Wolfe, he wanted to provide the reader confidence that the imperfect narratation of the first person was going to be pretty much perfect. Knowing Severian has this power, we trust his recollections. Smart guy, Wolfe.
That's a great observation (and +1 for referencing Howard Cosell). I did not dive into that "imperfect perfect memory" you reference--but it is fascinating to consider Severian as an unreliable narrator--either due to his memory not being as eidetic as he tells us it is, or because he's manipulating us, his readers, by only telling us what he wants to...
I remember a interview with Wolfe in which he discusses using the first person. He said all narration is by definition unreliable. But I don't think Wolfe would double cross us.
I read the Shadow of the Torturer and yes I noticed the structure to be unique. However does that make it good? Not necessarily. The plot unfolds basically without any cause. One example is how Severian just stumbles upon the Claw randomly by driving a chariot into a monastery or something like that.
You are telling me the character just randomly stumbles upon one of the most powerful artifacts? Also the members of the monastery just let him get away with it. Like what? For me the entire book felt like a very long poem that is meant to be analyzed like you are doing right now. If you read it for the plot it is mind numbingly nonsensical and boring.
Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your viewpoint.
No, I definitely do not think "unique = good," and I completely understand why this particular brand of unique would not work for many readers. Maybe even most readers. But here, the structure, plot, and themes manage to coalesce into something greater than their parts, unifying it and deepening it. Not just to please overthinkers and PhDs, but because it works. I myself did not find it boring--challenging, yes, but not boring :)
As for the coincidence you mention regarding the Claw, my sense is Severian was "meant" to have it. In the final book, it seems implied the Pelerines know he has it--and there's more said about even what the Claw "is" (and is not...I won't spoil it here.) Also, Catholic fantasy has a strong sense of what Tolkien calls "eucatastrophe"--miraculous events, seemingly-unrealistic, which lead to joyous, happy endings. These may be pre-ordained by God, active in the world. I'm probably going on a limb here, but much about Severian's gaining and later "use" of the Claw--as well as multiple other events--reminds me of this.
Thanks once again for commenting!
I agree. Chesterton was Wolfe's main influence, after all. I also think the series is loosely based on The Pilgrim's Progress; the similarities are uncanny.
Thanks so much for lifting this! I didn't know either of those facts--and they help frame things!
I appreciate your comment. I apologize if I sound aggressive, I just really wanted to like the book. I read it in page and in audiobook at the same time repeating sections to try and grasp it. And even after all that I just had to drop it at the end because it was not giving me anything.
Anyways, I do like the themes of the book. I subscribed to see what other books you recommended!
Please don't apologize! Love the perspective--it helps keep me in check :) Thanks once again for taking the time to think this through!