Comments on: Veniss Underground – Jeff Vandermeer

By: Ciara

Ciara — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:24:26 +0000

So it has to be Azimov for seminal SciFi!!!!

By: Paddy

Paddy — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:10:36 +0000

Hey all.
Here is a link to a web archive of a discusion thread that MJ Harisson started, discussing the new weird and its uses ( or lack of them)

http://web.archive.org/web/20030608134737/http://www.ttapress.com/discus/messages/30/764.html?1052820049

Parts of this discussion are also printed in the New Weird anthology, that ann mentions. I particularly like Steph ’s post (tenth one from the top – I am assuming this is Steph Swainston, but not sure).

Anyway, great summary of the meeting, Eve, and cheers ,Jeff, for commenting:)

Back to marking essays

By: evex

evex — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:54:45 +0000

Seth, it was great to have you at the meeting. Still haven’t decided on my seminal SF novel although have been giving it some thought. My teenage reading focused a lot of fantasy, so it probably was a film or TV show that first made a big impression on me sci-fi wise!

And, wow, how great to have the views of the author to add to our debate. It’s fascinating to have his insight into what he was trying to achieve.

By: Seth

Seth — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:08:58 +0000

Thanks to one and all for invting me down to my very first night in the Cumberland. It took me back to my uni days studying English Lit!

I’d love to get a proper definition of New Weird though. The difference in style, approach and subject between the books of China Miéville (some say he sits on the throne of the New weird castle) and Veniss Underground seems pretty significant to me. The last major sci-fi genre that I remember springing up was cyberpunk, but there you could easily see the similarities between the authours involved in that movement; Gibson, Stephenson and Bruce Sterling.

Wikipedia doesn’t help a great deal either. Maybe if Jeff comes back to read our follow ups he’d be able to give us his insight?

By: Ann

Ann — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:10:50 +0000

Yet again an awesome summary of our streams of consciousness Eve! I did actually like the second person though, I don’t think I managed to finish what I wanted to say about it because we all had such strong reactions and a lot to get off our chests about the book. I wanted to say it’s hard to pull it off but it really came across in Veniss Underground. It wouldn’t put me off reading some more Vandermeer, in fact I’ve ordered a book of New Wierd stories edited by his wife to explore a bit further into that symbol-crazy underworld…

By: Jeff VanderMeer

Jeff VanderMeer — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:36:59 +0000

That was fascinating to read. some points. Orpheus deranged was there not Heart of Darkness. Dark humor is intentional throughout. Allowing cross triangulation of three viewpoints to build characterization intended. As a derangement of the picturesque novel cathedral didn’t have to play a larger role but I understand the point being made. Nicholas is intentionally annoying. Different readers have different reactions to second person. Shadrach does indeed worship not love Nicola. He does not relate to her as a real person. Nicola’s leg is I believe rebuilt for her by the psychewitch. Veniss is intended as much or more as far future dark fantasy by way of Bosch than as SF. Thanks for your wonderfully detailed discussion of the book, which I appreciate. I wrote it when I was 25 and am still fond of it.