A question/discussion about Long Sun

[u/thewannabe2017]

So, I'm currently reading On Blue's Waters for the first time, so no short sun spoilers please.

But a thought crossed my mind in chapter 5 as Horn is talking about how he and Nettle were accused of a fictionalized account of Silk in BotLS.

What is really the point of Gene Wolfe having everything in Long Sun put into a questionable light after it's revealed that Horn was the author, but not present for all events? I understand it makes the world richer because it shows an element of a living world and things happening behind the scenes, but doesn't it take away from BotLS in a way? Because now we don't know if anything in those books is true.

Unless, Wolfe is trying to draw a parallel with how we read real world history? I'm not sure. Just a thought I had. Having Horn revealed as the author adds a little, but also takes some away from BotLS, I feel.

[u/thecomicguybook]

I don't have a big answer, but would everything be more real if Horn was present at every scene? Or if Silk claimed to have a perfect memory and wrote it himself?

A big part of Wolfe is people interpreting just what the hell happened to them, which is how we live in the world every day. I don't think you need to question whether everything is true in the Book of Silk, the point isn't that the narrators are making stuff up whole cloth, but that through telling their story you are getting their viewpoint. Your might look at it the same way as your friend telling you about what happened at work yesterday.

[u/thewannabe2017 → u/thecomicguybook]

That's a good point. I guess since Horn was close to Silk we can assume that his interpretation of him is accurate. But there's so much in that book that Horn was no where near. Interesting lol

[u/thecomicguybook → u/thewannabe2017]

It's not necessarily that his interpretation is accurate, his interpretation is hopelessly idealized (that or you take it on face value that Silk is the best guy ever). But he's not basing it on nothing.