Comments on: The Religious Implications of Gene Wolfe’s The Book Of The New Sun

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:36:23 +0000

Actually I have much to pick here.
1.) Wolfe has specifically said that Severian is not Christ but Christian in character. He could very well be a great prophet and wonder worker in this world without being Christ.
2.) The discussion of the Trinity leaves much to be desired and I think you and some of the commenters here are confused by it. That’s ok, it is complicated, but I’m not sure you should use it in an article without knowing more.
3.) “In the days before Judaism and Christianity had destroyed the ancient matriarchal religion” at which point I call bullcrap. That has to be one of the single most ignorant things I’ve heard in a loooooooooong time. While it is a modern Wiccan fantasy that somehow the Germanic tribes were all quasi-monotheistic goddess worshipers its a load of claptrap. There is _zero_ archeological evedince for it and the theory has been _long_ (almost out of the box) discredited.

By: Fred Remus

Fred Remus — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:14:43 +0000

A small nitpick; the name Severian is unrelated to Stephen, Stefan, etc. It comes from the Latin names Serverus and Severianus. The name Severiano is still used in Spanish and Italian. Seve, the first name of Spanish golf pro Ballesteros, is short for Severiano.

By: Brian Kehler

Brian Kehler — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:20:26 +0000

I disagree that Wolfe paints “all women as evil.” There are
a few ambiguous Beatrice figures in several of the women in the New
Sun and Long Sun books, and Dorcas (raised from the dead like the
girl in the New Testament)also resembles Goethe’s tragic Gretchen
in relation to Severian. These are highly sympathetic characters,
very human as well as archanely holy in the Dantean sense. The men,
in contrast, seem much more evil (Severian’s role as torturer, for
example).

By: S. Decoteaux Bates

S. Decoteaux Bates — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:12:45 +0000

A clear and concise article. However,one feels bound to mention that the angel Raphael is mentioned in the Deuterocanonical Book of Tobit, a text cosidered canoical by the Catholic and Orthodox churches, and Mr.Wolfe, as you mention above, belongs to the former. Apologies for one’s compusive hair-splittig.
(As to the Hierogrammates existing as literal archangels–one is curious as to the metapysical implications once the fact of their creation by humans is considered. Does God allow his lesser servents to manufacture those greater than themselves [light denied, as it were]?)
Always a pleasure to read a reflective piece on the work of Mr. Wolfe; thank you.

By: Stephen Palmer

Stephen Palmer — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:55:59 +0000

I’m an atheist of the Dawkins variety (though on atheism I’m not so annoyingly verbose as he is), so it’s rather a paradox that TBOTNS is my all-time favourite SF work…

Such is life.

By: Duergar

Duergar — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:01:55 +0000

Sometimes it seems to me that the author was attempting some kind of religious manifesto with this work (or aspects of it). I have no problem with the religious/Catholic symbolism, but what I find disappointing is the work’s self-assured dogmatism, with some quite devious implications (all women are evil), and the acridity that I feel against non-religious worldviews.

By: Gerard

Gerard — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:54:07 +0000

I'm very proud to say that the Wimbledon Book Club (which I started and run) read the first half of the Book of the New Sun and that this piece was very helpful to a number of members. Our last event discussing Mr Wolf's Masterwork is next Monday for anyone who happens to be in the London area: http://www.wimbledonbookclub.com/calendar/13250435/ Many thanks to the team behind this.

By: Jeff Liss

Jeff Liss — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 22:14:15 +0000

Love this, although I’m sure I have seen a version of it before on the Web, perhaps here.

The only point I would take issue with:

“There is also a ‘missing’ name in the holy trinity; we hear of the Increate (Holy Ghost) and the Pancreator, but never of any son.”

It makes sense that GW, as a Catholic, would involve the Trinity. But I don’t see why it is that the Pancreator and Increate should be considered different aspects of God. That which is the only Creator, the one who created everything (Pancreator) is itself the only thing which is not created (Increate). Thus, I would consider these two epithets to be synonymous.

This is not to say that Severian does not represent Christ. He isn’t Christ as perfection, as it’s obvious he is a sinner, but rather Christ’s human nature.

By: Stephen Palmer

Stephen Palmer — Mon, 24 May 2010 09:12:36 +0000

Thank you gentlemen for your comments – and, Michael, just to add that I loved “Lexicon Urthus”!

Aaron, the fountain is another example of the joyous ambiguity that GW is a master of…
I hadn’t thought of the White Fountain, but of course that seems more likely than my suggestion.

By: Michael Andre-Driussi

Michael Andre-Driussi — Fri, 21 May 2010 18:35:57 +0000

It is a fine thing to be able to read this piece, finally! Thank you to Stephen Palmer and Team Ultan for making it available.

I knew about it from “Urth-Man Extraordinary” — no, wait . . . looking over my annotated copy, the original only goes up to 1990. Well, then. I knew there were Urth-related articles and reviews in Vector, most of which I have never seen.

Anyway, I like the article, especially the part about the mirror book and the eclipse on its spine. That’s an excellent example of the Melville-like layering of symbols going on in the Urth Cycle (if not all of Wolfe’s work).

By: Aaron Singleton

Aaron Singleton — Wed, 19 May 2010 22:44:58 +0000

Not to nitpick this otherwise enlightening piece, but I always thought the fountain Severian sees in the necropolis represented the White Fountain that would replace the dying sun and not the fountain at the House Absolute. Perhaps I am in error, or it could be that Wolfe intended for both fountains to be associated with the symbol.