Talk:The Book of the New Sun

message: This is a minor point, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that Wolfe did not actually invent any words for these books, although some were quite archaic. However, the article as it stands reads "...archaic, obscure, or even invented words..." Can anyone else comment on the accuracy of this statement? --Flyingspuds 05:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Neologisms

message: If Gene Wolfe had written The Sixth Sense, the twist would not have been revealed at the end. He would simply assume that his readers were smart enough to figure it out and if not, too bad. --Heathcliff 02:16, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Naw, that's not quite right. Now, what would be Wolfean is if you had a narrator who never mentions that he is dead, and never tells you why he is damned- oh wait. Never mind. --Maru 21:47, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wolfe's subtlety

message: This needs massive expansion to do justice to Wolfe's work. There have been several published treatises on the subject, not to mention a whole culture of Internet discussion groups. References and citations, of course, are crucial here. We should aim for a structured description of widely-held interpretations rather than just listing any crazy theory some guy on Usenet cooked up. Some things that come to mind (and in no capacity am I knowledgeable on the matter) off the top of my head:
# Severian's parentage: The woman playing Saint Cassandra in the Seekers ritual is Severian's mother OR the Autarch is Severian's mother (yes, mother).
# Severian actually did drown in his childhood Gyol swim. ...etc.
Doubtlessly there are dozens more themes that can be relevantly explored in the article. Albrecht 17:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'd furthermore state that the "interpretations" currently on the page are little more than tidbits of possible information regarding specific characters/places/times within the text--when I think of interpretations I think of full-scale readings of the texts, a comprehensive lens through which to view the story as a whole. DeadWolfBones 09:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The "extra" fifth book in the series Urth of the New Sun reveals that Severain and Valeria are married. The stuff about the maternal grandmother is a theory developed in one of the books
Peter Wright's Attending Daedalus, or Robert Borski's Solar Labyrinth (I can't remember which). Tomgreeny 23:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Whats the argument for it? LamontCranston (talk) 11:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Valeria being Severian's maternal grandmother was discussed a number of times, but I first read about it in Peter Wright's Attending Daedalus. I find it to be reasonably convincing. Without having any of the relevant material in front of me, the idea rests on the belief that the woman playing Saint Katherine at the torturers' ceremonies is Severian's mother, which is also a common theory. If I recall, Severian notes that she is always present at the ceremonies, so we can conclude that she does not reside far. Also, he notes that she seems to never age. Where do we know of that's near the Matachin Tower and is timeless? The Atrium of Time, where Valeria's family lives. Then comes the second part. When Severian was away for a decade, Valeria married someone else. My memory is hazy here but I recall that there is a pretty fat hint dropped that unlike when she was married to Severian, they had a child. Some character (Odillo?) comments that Valeria's new husband, the child's father, actually resembles Severian. If one combines that with the time-traveling Atrium and the fact that Wolfe rarely makes lightly the types of hints, you get that Valeria is Severian's grandmother. Note that my explanation here is far from perfect, recited from memory, to prove it's far from a crackpot theory. Dynamic1 (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Interpretation

message: The character list is entirely from The Shadow of the Torturer and should be expanded to those introduced in the rest of the series. --Pokeyrmb 05:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters

message: Ascians can all speak Ascian; Loyal to the Group of Seventeen was unusual because he understood and spoke the language of the Commonwealth (while still only expressing himself with the direct translations of approved Ascian phrases), and the female soldier in the hospital believes this is because he was an interpreter for the Ascians. -Father Inire 05:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction about Loyal to the Group of 17 

message: Is it really necessary to spoil the book in the first paragraph? Usually that kind of thing is kept in the synopsis.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.177.253 (talk) 00:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I think the lead paragraph is de-spoilified now. I left in the bit about Severian becoming Autarch, because that's revealed in the first chapter. Father Inire (talk) 09:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoilers

message: *Severian: main character, an apprentice to the Guild of Torturers on Urth
*Roche: young man in the Guild of Torturers
*Drotte: young man in the Guild of Torturers
*Eata: young boy in the Guild of Torturers
*Vodalus: the high-born leader of the rebellion against the Autarch
*Master Gurloes: a leader of the Guild of Torturers
*Master Palaemon: a leader of the Guild of Torturers
*Master Malrubius: a deceased master of the Guild of Torturers
*Thecla: an exultant chatelaine, condemned to be tortured, and with whom Severian falls in love
*Agia: a shopkeeper
*Agilus: a shopkeeper, twin brother of Agia. He wears masks -- perhaps more than one
*Hildegrin: an excavator and agent of Vodalus
*Dorcas: a girl whom Severian finds in the Botanic Gardens
*Dr. Talos: a traveling actor/playwright, described as "vulpine" in appearance and demeanor by Severian
*Baldanders: a giant companion of Dr. Talos, his gigantism caused by artificial means
*Jolenta: a waitress recruited by Dr. Talos for his troupe, and made into a great beauty via his skills in cosmetic surgery 
*Hethor: Agia's elderly suitor, a former sailor
*Thea: Thecla's half-sister, Vodalus' lover
*The Autarch: ruler of the Commonwealth
*Father Inire: advisor to the Autarch
*The Green Man: a man with green skin who purports to be from the future
*Jonas: a space-farer with a metal hand
*Typhon: revived former despot who had ruled all humanity
*Piaton: Typhon's servant, a man with great strength
*Pia: slave girl freed by Severian
*Little Severian: child who accompanies Severian for a time
*Ymar: called "The Almost-Just," historical former autarch
*Ossipago: Heirodule who encounters Severian traveling backwards in time
*Famulimas: Heirodule companion of Ossipago
*Barbatus: Heirodule companion of Famulimas, possesses a martial nature
*Ouen: Servant at inn near the Sanguinary Fields who sends a warning letter
*Triskele: Loyal three-legged dog that Severian rescues from Bear Tower
*Valeria: Aristocratic young woman Severian encounters in the Atrium of Time, of an armiger family. Described as having a heart-shaped face
*Ultan: blind, ancient, wise librarian of the Autarch
*Rudesind: elderly painting cleaner who instructs Severian
*Cyriaca: Wife of minor landholder near Thrax
*Winnoc: self-sold slave of the Pelerines
*Guasacht: leader of cavalry troop joined by Severian in the north
*Miles: soldier encountered by Severian in the northern woods
*Daria: female cavalry soldier
*Loyal to the Group of Seventeen: captured Ascian soldier who is exceptional in that he is fluent in Severian's language
*Mannea: Pelerine elder who gives Severian a special mission
*Ash: wise observer who lives in a strange house above a canyon
I moved this list here to allow removal ofthe cleanup tag, and because i agree that it is crufty and daages the article. These books are too important and meaningful to require list of minor characters like those fan-boys for lesser books make.Yobmod (talk) 21:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters

message: The interpretations section is woefully inadequate.
It doesn't state why any of the listed ideas are important. One of them is actually objectively false. While The Fifth Head of Cerberus is thematically similar, Gene Wolfe has stated in interviews that it is not part of the Sun Cycle.
I would like the interpretations to be about how the solutions to these strange underlying mysteries all contribute to the work.
When I next get a chance, I will revisit the book and consult the mailing list (and interviews with the author) for the meaning to these mysteries.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tulpa (talk • contribs) 18:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretations. 

message: What's the deal with this again...Severian is Jesus, and one of the core themes of the story is that God's message is difficult to understand and arduous to experience, something like that? It's been bandied about the mailing lists for years, the scholars who study the series have written about it, and I am sure there are referable interviews with Wolfe where he explains the spiritual story he is trying to tell. The article should have SOME mention of this. Transentient (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Biblical Angle 

message: Why is this given the category of picaresque?  I find it equally puzzling that such is mentioned in the Picaresque novel article with a citation needed tag, but that's not germane to this talk page.  
To whit:
*The antagonist is not an antihero.
:While he is raised and trained in an unpopular and unpleasant profession, he does not revel in the darker aspects of it, keeping in sight the more "noble" aspect of the ingrained necessity of such a function (which he later comes to question).  To him, the job is little more than a job that someone must do and for which he is trained.  Many pains are taken to separate the joy and pleasure he associates with his career is that of doing a job well and the comradeship of his guildmates.  This is merely the swineherd who would be king had he been raised by a guild of torturers instead of a pig farmer.  He retains all, not just some, of the heroic nature expected of one to make such an elevation along with the human capacity of making mistakes.
*travel
:This is probably the strongest aspect it shares with a picaresque story; however travel in and of itself is not enough.   In many ways, this story arc has much more in common with the likes of the Arthurian legends or the story of Odysseus than picaresque stories in that his travels generally have the purpose of fulfilling a goal and not the aimless wandering of some rogue poking his nose into whatever he can.  
*satire
:Mayhap I am dense, but I cannot recall any point in the story that can be considered satirical without considerable mental gymnastics. 
*episodic
:Eh, in the sense that it was a framed narrative aware that sequels would follow (which well could be a function of the publishing industry's practices and not any artistic decision), then yes; however within this story there is far more continuity through the "episodes" such that they are more scenes than episodes, but this just may be my interpretation of the difference between the two.
tl;dr, I believe picaresque novels is the incorrect category to have this in.  Now, I'm going to go cross post my objections to it being discussed on that page as well.
67.142.178.24 (talk) 21:42, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: to whit is not English, you should write: to wit. You seem to insist on the Uylenspiegel definition of picaresque, which is fair enough, but to most readers the present text seems to fall within the category broadly conceived. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:D402:C7D:C36F:E0B4 (talk) 09:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picaresque novel?

message: "What about" means does anyone know? does anyone have a useful source re any point? what should we say in this article? all that and more!
===Science Fiction===
What about classification of New Sun as science fiction and/or fantasy? either in general or specifically for the Locus Awards? Locus recognizes best F and best SF novels separately. The first four volumes scored as fantasy novels and Urth as science fiction. Is that clearly right or wrong? explicable or in-?
===Novel===
What about classification of the first four books as one novel or as four? either in general or specifically for the Locus all-time polls? Locus ranked The Shadow of the Torturer number four all-time fantasy novel in 1987; The Book of the New Sun number three in 1998. Many series were considered single entries in 1998. Is the criterion evident? 
The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit were separate entries in both polls, and ranked one–two in both. As far as I know they are universally considered distinct novels, and the former is universally considered one book rather than three or six. The Fellowship of the Ring was separately reviewed when separately published, and it may have been considered for awards. Is there a useful analogy? Back to Urth, is there a difference in tone that warrants a distinct science fiction label? --perhaps as a difference in tone warrants a distinct children's label for The Hobbit? --P64 (talk) 18:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification 

message: What about classification of the first four books as one novel or as four? either in general or specifically for the Locus all-time polls? Locus ranked The Shadow of the Torturer number four all-time fantasy novel in 1987; The Book of the New Sun number three in 1998. Many series were considered single entries in 1998. Is the criterion evident? 
The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit were separate entries in both polls, and ranked one–two in both. As far as I know they are universally considered distinct novels, and the former is universally considered one book rather than three or six. The Fellowship of the Ring was separately reviewed when separately published, and it may have been considered for awards. Is there a useful analogy? Back to Urth, is there a difference in tone that warrants a distinct science fiction label? --perhaps as a difference in tone warrants a distinct children's label for The Hobbit? --P64 (talk) 18:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Novel

message: The paragraph beginning "Since the original four-volume novel, [..]" in the section New Sun series is almost identical the paragraph starting Solar Cycle (except for a reference to that section). I'd suggest getting rid of the first instance, since the forward reference is a little superfluous. NelC (talk) 03:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated paragraph 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Book of the New Sun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080314072831/http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit153.html to http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/NomLit153.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: While I love this series of books, and am glad there's a Wikipedia article about it, the article needs a lot of work.
Among other things, the "Plot" synopsis needs some major reworking.  It's far too detailed in some regards, an yet misses other details essential to the story.  Also, it introduces a lot of terms without explanation:  Baldanders is mentioned several times before any mention of his giantism inintroduced; nothing is said about Father Inire, other that that he is "mysterious"; Severian suddenly finds the" Claw of the Conciliator" among his belongings, but nothing is said about what this IS, until much later; no explanation of the importance of mirrors and time travel to the story srch -- they're just dropped in there and there like bon-bons; nothing about Dorcas having been raised from the dead; no mention of Severian killing Typhon; nothing mentioned about the hierodules, central to the manipulation of events, until the "Major Themes" section, where they just suddenly appear; -- and on and on.
Someone who has read the books (e.g., a fan) will be able to parse that disjointed narrative together.  But someone coming to it for encyclopedic information without the background of having read the books is going to find a string of undefined things and concepts.
Good start, but much editing required.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 00:47, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Remember the article is not just for fans

message: There is very little in the Severian article that isn't already in this one- it also has a shortage of references, and goes into a bit too much detail for an article about a fictional character who occurs in a single series. Propose merging anything substantial from that article here, and making Severian a redirect to The Book of the New Sun. --Spasemunki (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  It seems more like a redundant content fork. Now there are two articles that need to be edited for the same content. How is having content duplicated across two articles an improvement? --Spasemunki (talk) 01:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging/Redirect Severian to this Article 

message: Well, yes, ὑδράργυρος has always been the word for mercury, it is not an invention by Wolfe as the text seems to suggest. Cf. the standard symbol Hg. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:D402:C7D:C36F:E0B4 (talk) 09:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "hydrargyrum is liquid mercury" 

message: Some of the plot summaries, especially Citadel, are not accurate. 2A00:23C5:D11C:401:9579:32D5:1722:B88D (talk) 03:51, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect plot summaries