Timewaster's Guide Archive

seriously. reading patterson is like reading a somewhat violent and overly sexual version of See Spot Run. Though to be fair, See Spot Run has more words per page.

not to be late to the party or anything, but using James Patterson as a benchmark for chapter lengths isnt the best idea in my opinion. his books of 90K words tend to be 120 chapters.  That's right, usually 750 words per chapter. A lot of times the chapters are only a paragraph. I personally think this is a gimmick to artificially speed up the pace of an otherwise were average (at best) novel.

My personal opinion is that a regular chapter size is a good idea. I go for 3-4K. However, I feel that prologues should be shorter, and that climatic chapters can be shorter to pick up the pace.

the major hole was that the other Active was there for if things got out of hand. they tried to explain it by saying "oh, she took attention off the singer." that was a terribad explanation for why Sierra didn't kick his head in earlier. she was there as back-up, and yet she did absolutely nothing. it was a poor way for them to get across the "friend" arc they have going on. they should be checking her wiring to see why she was so awful.

the nod at the end was fine, and it sets the show going in the right direction. however the story mechanism used to get there was clumsy at best.

i did enjoy that the mob contact the FBI guy has was an active. not totally surprising, but carried out well. 

I think that, once again, the character description is being missed due to how much is being thrown at you. Book 1 is all new material, and it's all dumped on you at once. Book 2 starts, and it only starts with a few of the characters you thought you were getting to know from Book 1, so readers tend to feel a little bummed by that. It also makes readers feel that they are starting over. Book 3 goes back to tell what was going on with all the characters not mentioned in book 2. The learning curve is less steep.

One of the things I have learned to accept about this series is that this story has gone on LONG before we pick it up in book 1. Personally, i find it refreshing. I can only take so many kids growing up on farms who find out they are "special" before I want to hang myself. Remember, the series is "A Tale of the Malazan Book of the Fallen." These are all interlinking tales in a world heading towards a Convergence (a term used frequently in the series) of massive proportions. This isn't a Jordan travel-log.

Another note: Erikson follows a certain pattern for story telling. If the reader is astute, he/she will catch a huge number of hints that explain what has happened in a new light, and foreshadowing of huge events to come (tarot cards do this a TON in the books). After a book or so, he has his, "In case you didn't catch it before, here is the deal:" moments. For example, stuff that happens as early as chapter 1 of Book 1 is explained in the prologue of Book 3. If you have a good memory, and like "aha!" moments, you will like this style of writing. This pattern if followed for the whole series.

Characters: Some die. Some stay dead. Some get reincarnated. Some become Ascendants. Some are already Gods. Many change their names. Erikson is cruel to many of his characters. They show up in further books, but not all of them. Book 2 introduces Mappo and Icarium who are just fantastic. The relationship they have that is furthered in subsequent books is incredible. There are new characters intro'ed in every book.

Soletaken: very important. its explained in book 1, and further elaborated on in every book. With the sea serpent event, it has a purpose, and it's also used to show that Fiddler is very prepared and, simply, a stud.

War: Once the intro to book 2 is passed, a majority of the book is a traveling war with a huge conflict at the end. the entire final 1/4 of book 3 is a war (and book 3 is LARGE). They are the kind of conflicts that I like - heavy casualties, heroic stands, big consequences, betrayals, no real "winner."

Prequels: as far as i know, only Night of Knives serves as a prequel. Return of the Crimson Guard I believe takes place after book 6. You dont have to read any of Esselmont's stuff. I haven't yet.

Last random tidbit: sometimes spoilers in this series are good. Erikson's stuff is very busy, and it can be hard to see the characters past the plot (or at times the reverse). Im very anti-spoiler, but in the case of this series, spoilers have sometimes made the series more fun for me. But that's me.

/high-five Andrew

Your reactions to books 2 and 3 were identical to mine. I always tell people that once you read books 2 and 3 (which run concurrently), you will be floored. The way Erikson shows all sides of a conflict is incredible, and it makes your attachment to the characters extremely strong.

Once I get my collector's edition of Gardens of the Moon, I am going to start rereading this series.

Not to bust your chops WriterDan, but your comments on character are a bit "out there." Since you haven't read the full novel of book 2, I think the credibility of your statement is a bit questionable. I think that maybe had there not been so much time between reads, you may have a different opinion. Like most authors, the ability to craft characters develops as the books go on and the author learns. I have hooked hundreds of people on the series, and character is not what their complaints are. Erikson's characters are extremely complex and none of them are "black and white."

Now, i do see where you are coming from in a sense. There is SO much going on that it can be easy to lose sight of the characterization that is in there. There is actually an ABSURD amount of character, but with how much info is thrown at you in all of book 1, and then the first chunk of book 2, it can be overlooked. The thing is that the learning curve happens again at the beginning of every book. This learning curve is usually what turns people off, because nothing is simple like in the other series they have read. There is no "beginning" to this story, and many readers are put off by that. I will admit that after reading book 1 i was a little meh. My manager at the time made me continue on saying "dont worry, things will make much more sense, and clues will start popping out at you." I did. By the end of book 2, i had such a connection with the characters, the the climax was made that much more powerful.

Starting today, I will be reading The Judging Eye by R Scott Bakker. My work day is basically being wasted due to the anticipation.

I'll leave the editing questions for Ookla. Here is some input from when I did the whole bookstore thing:

When you buy a book a x% off, the author still gets his or her cut of the sales. Generally their contracts are tiered. For hardbacks, lets say they get 15% of the cover price in royalties for the first 20K books sold. Then for every book sold after that initial 20K, they get 17% of the cover price. The remaining amounts go towards covering any expenses incurred in the printing of the book - printing, marketing, yada yada. Those fees, I imagine, vary from book to book. When the novel goes into paperback, the royalty percentage drops down a lot lower because the profit margins are WAY lower on paperbacks. They make their money by selling in sheer numbers. An author might get 5% royalties on the cover price for the first 50K paperbacks sold, then 6% for any sold after that.  The other thing to realize is that author do not actually receive any of these royalties until those cumulative earnings pay back the publishing house for the advance they gave the author. So, the bonus for authors who sell more than expected? First, they make higher royalties, and pay off their advance faster. Second, the better they sell, the more likely they will receive better subsequent contracts. Then it all snowballs, and you get more and more royalties with bigger and bigger contracts. Good stuff.

Did that sound more or less how you know it Ookla?

Now, as for buying the book at 40% off, you realize the real reason for that is to build loyalty and entice you to buy additional books right? Do you remember when the last Harry Potter book came out, and stores were selling it at 50% off or higher? That is a direct financial loss to the bookstore. They typically buy books like that for 46% off the cover price. The thought there is that if you can entice customers into buying the main book for 40-50% off, you can then get them to spend those savings on another book with no discount attached. The money-phrase in bookstores is "Units-Per-Transaction." A store with high "UPTs" will make those losses taken on heavily discounted books turn into profits - assuming the bookstore salespeople know their stuff (which is rare these days).

As for splitting a book, the bookstores don't have a direct say. By direct i mean the publishes don't call up Borders and say, "Gee, do you need us to split the book?" The publisher decides how they will best cover their costs and make the most money. if that means splitting the book, then so-be-it. Now, part of that means they look at bookstores and say, "Well, considering the shelves at bookstores are X long and Y wide, the hardbacks and/or paperbacks need to be split in order to fit Z number of copies. If we DONT get Z number of copies on the shelves, then we lose exposure, and we may lose money."

That help at all?

And Ookla will slap me into place if i messed up anywhere. Ookla and I tend to have awesome discussions about this stuff when we get together every now and then.