Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Errent

Pages: [1]
1
I just thought I'd reply with hearty agreements all around. Demon, I'm thrilled to see what an amazing impact Brandon's books have had on your life. Sometimes it's just amazing.

Since NBGA has yet to make an appearance, I also thought I'd make a few remarks on George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series--remarks which could probably be applied to a couple of the other suggestions made throughout this post. Granted, Insomnius, I'm not Bookstore Guy, though he and I have had this conversation before . . . but I might be able to make some suggestions as to why he suggested the series.

First, I'm impressed you set the series aside. Not because of the series, but because of the genre. It says a lot. It says that you know what you like, and I'm always thrilled to find other readers like that. Readers don't have to suffer through crap we don't like . . . Hell, Tolkien and Lewis wrote their works because they couldn't find anything they wanted out there (granted, Tolkien wanted a LOT, but we're grateful for it.) So I'm in your camp there. It doesn't surprise me that it was Martin either . . . people either love him or hate him.

That said, you should know that Bookstore Guy didn't suggest Martin because of the language, whether it's vulgarity or its anachronisities . . . though I have to confess: they aren't that anachronistic. Most of the profanity has been around since about the 1400's . . . heck, the OED has a reference for SOB that dates back to 1330. Granted that doesn't exactly mean that these words were common place back then, but they DID exist and there are recorded uses. Since Martin has based much of the setting of ASoIF on the War of the Roses, which started in the mid-1400's, the language isn't exactly out of place . . . though the profanity is probably used more in Martin's series than it would have been back then. I say you've got a good point though in this: no reader should have to put up with distractions. If it distracts you, then it's not your type of book.

Your second point can definately be applied to Martin . . . He's got a cast of thousands, and there is a lot about his world he just doesn't reveal. It makes many of the events in the books seem very coincidental, or convenient, or  inconsistent. That section where Catelyn Stark returns from the grave as undead made me drop the book. I hadn't had any preparation for that. Part of me loves it, and part of me doesn't. However, just because something hasn't happened in the series doesn't mean that it can't. Returning from the dead isn't exactly an unfamiliar occurance in fantasy . . . and let's face it: we had no warning that Gandalf would come back. We just sort of take it for granted (decades after the book was first released) that this is how the book needed to be. All that we know is that Eru (God) sent him back . . . Similarly, there are many things in Jordan's Wheel of Time which we are told are impossible, but managed to be overcome. I remember thinking certain characters were done for after they were stilled or gentled . . . it had been clear that not even in the Age of Legend had that been curable. Convenient that the characters find out how to do it here.
     This, however, is more of a direct address to why BookstoreGuy suggested Martin . . . and why the series is so loved and hated. It is different in many ways. Much of the fantasy liguistical aspects are pretty plain and straight forward; much of the relationships and situations are basic (bastard son of the king, people seeking the crown, dragons, etc.); and the characters, the thousands of characters, don't stand out as uniquely as they do in most fantasies. What people love is how these elements combine in unexpected ways. It's the fact that there really IS no congruity. *SPOILERS BEWARE* Our "hero" dies at the end of book, a boy is left seriously crippled, the best swordsman's HAND is cut off (why no bad guys ever thought of that before, i DON'T know), and we've only seen people come back to life with BAD effects. *END OF SPOILERS* It's unexpected, and instead of the thrill of anticipating a foretold event, we anticipate an explanation. The characters may not stand out (there's no elf, no dwarf--wait. Scratch that last one.), but that's because they aren't as cookie cutter as we expect them to be. It takes more investment, but we enjoy characters because their choices describe them, not their quirks. It's a harsh way of writing, and it's risky. Just about as many foibles in Martin's style as there are fortes . . . it isn't for everyone. Hell, it isn't for MOST people. But others should be made aware that it is there.

As for your final point, I must concede here. Martin is VERY quiet about how these religions work. I personally wish there were more information about that. It's a very fine line between ambiuity and TMI, and I personally think you're on the ball here. He's ambiguous, and I'm not sure if the value of religion will ever be clarified in the series. The War of the Roses was a very gritty, harsh thing. Religion can be incredibly impotent concerning the matter of succession. That seems to be what Martin's series is about . . . an issue of struggle. Not of Good versus Evil, but struggle between people in general. My feeling is that if a religion has power, then it should have a purpose for that power (reasons behind it, and goals before it) . . . but then again, I'm not choosing how the book is written. Just whether I read it.

Hopefully you can see that BookstoreGuy recommended the series, not because it was perfect or for everyone, but just that it has a strong track record. He and I both find issue with some aspects of Martin's writing . . . but mostly were just damn jealous, and just wish we could write that well and have so few issues ourselves.

Merit-wise in general, however. I'm not going to touch that one. The world itself could argue about what stories have merit and which don't, and the discussion would last until the end of time. Merit is one thing to one person, and another to the next. Martin just so happens to fall into the category of authors for whom there isn't much middle ground. Either way, Excellent points, and I'm interested in hearing what alternatives to Martin you might recommend.

EDIT: Other than Gaiman. He's fabulous, but I've read just about all that he's done.

2
Brandon Sanderson / Re: I want info about Goodkind/Brandon's comments
« on: December 14, 2007, 04:11:00 AM »
Well, I shouldn't be surprised to see this thread res'd . . . but I am, and since Steve commented I'll throw my two cents in as well.

I remember enjoying Wizard's First Rule. I did feel that it was a bit derivative, but I felt there were some enjoyable and unique qualities. Goodkind can say whatever he wants about his work of course, there's no question about that--and readers can feel however they want towards them. If he wants to say his series is focused on the rights of plantlife, then I'm cool with that. I, and probably the rest of his readers, will get a kick from the fantasy.

However, I do have problems with his statements about fantasy. As negatively as his ex-fans may be, they aren't as critical as he is. He speaks of plot, character, and humanity as though they were things fantasy doesn't normally contain. To speak of an entire genre and the works within it in such a way is rather arrogant and presumptuous. To claim that he has the freedom of claiming his books are about greater things while the entire fantasy genre is as HE claims it to be? Utter foolishness and very illogical.

There are magical aspects in the series which the plot doesn't hinge upon of course . . . but even the plot of the first novel could not exist without magic. Richard rides on a Dragon under an enchantment of illusion to meet his friends . . . that is vital to the plot. So vital that it is forseen in a vision no less. But it apparently isn't vital enough to define the story. This leads to the age old rule of writing . . . if it isn't necessary to the story, then it shouldn't be in the story. If magic isn't vital to the series, then why is it there? If it is necessary (i.e. vital) to tell the story he wants to tell, then it is necessary (i.e. vital.) In general, I think Goodkind should probably take into account the Wizard's Fifth Rule: "Mind what people do, not only what they say, for deeds will betray a lie." Goodkind seems to be writing a fantasy, but claims not to . . . which should we believe? Again, illogical.

Then there is the change in the series . . . its there. There isn't a question. Some may like it, and that's fine. Some may not, that's fine too. Goodkind is writing for himself,  he can do what he wants. I personally, don't enjoy stories with that much gratuitous vulgarity . . . but I'm sure many readers don't mind it. The philosophical meandering is there too. That I don't mind as much . . . though it does distract me.

I'm glad he's brought so many fans into the fantasy genre, and that he's seen such success. I'm also thrilled to see that so many have enjoyed his stories. In that respect, good for him and even better for his fans. Awesome. I don't, however, agree with his viewpoints or attitude; and since they've become more prevalent in the series as it has waxed on, I've stopped reading. I'd encourage people to read Wizard's First Rule, even if just to be aware of Goodkind . . . but I'd recommend it with a caveat--be aware of Goodkind's stance, and how the series evolves.

3
Brandon Sanderson / Re: Brandon To Write Wheel of Time Book 12
« on: December 12, 2007, 01:14:52 AM »
I figure I should congratulate Brandon again, publicly. I mean hey, I don't want to be thought a jerk, and Brandon deserves not just praise and grats, but repeated praise and grats. Way to go. Steve and I were expecting something big, but we couldn't have imagined something so . . . perfect.

I think that, as far as Jordan/Sanderson books go . . . I'll be happy to have closer. I probably wouldn't mind some sort of memorial publishing; a single work that allows everyone to revel in the depth of Jordan's world and remember him . . . fleshing out ideas he wasn't able to share without seeing his work commercialized. Something tasteful.

Also, a shout out to Child of Hurin. Welcome to the boards! Glad to see another convert.

4
Brandon Sanderson / Re: More Art for You to Digest
« on: November 18, 2007, 03:45:24 AM »
What a fantasy faux pax! Back in Junior High I often had a Norton book alongside a Foster book and while the two styles are drastically different, I often think of one author when intending the other. Her numerous male pen names haven't helped me either. Forgive me. Alice (or Andre, or Andrew, or Allen depending on which novels anyone might have read) must be rolling over in her grave. Thanks so much for pointing out my mistake Ookla. At least I knew it was the author of WitchWorld. That makes me feel like I'm not losing my mind entirely.

5
Brandon Sanderson / Re: More Art for You to Digest
« on: November 18, 2007, 01:54:16 AM »
Swiggly,

The LAST thing I intended was any offense, please forgive me. As I mentioned above, there isn't a problem with Mercedes Lackey. She's a fabulous author. As NBGA has correctly stated, niether he nor I have been published, while her publishing record is a fabulous testament to her abilities. That said, the majority of her covers are similar (anything co-written is slightly different as I will get to below.) It's not an insult, its just fact. Many have the same style, but even more evoke the same MOOD. Again, as mentioned above . . . I'm not saying that the style or mood of the covers have anything to do with her writing ability. The problem is that the style and mood of ANY cover will grant a first impression, whether or not that impression is true of the book's style or mood.

Let's examine some of the covers firsthand, so perhaps you can see why I used HER covers as an example and not someone else's. I should also throw in a caveat here--interestingly enough, it is usually the books co-written that diverge from the usual style and mood of her covers (Andre Norton seemed to dominate the cover's of their co-written books, and I have to confess that anything co-written with James Mallory has an AMAZING cover.) I realize that chasing covers can be a bit messy, so the best source I've found has been http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/l/mercedes-r-lackey/ . . . though I'm sure there are COUNTLESS covers that we'll be missing.

First, Elvenbane. The Halfblood Chronicles were co-written with Andre Norton, an old favorite of mine . . . you can see her influence heavily in these covers. In fact, were the authors names not on the cover, I would have pegged them as Norton. They resemble the Witchworld books in style . . . MOOD however, is a different story. The second book in the series has a solid scene of action on the cover, which implies more (you guessed it) action. The first and third however . . . have relatively weak looking dragons (the one on the third cover is GRINNING.) They also contain a woman seemingly lacking in any conflict. She doesn't appear brave, strong, pained, sacrificing, courageous, cowering, or even about to DO anything. She's reclining in the first cover, and appears to be telling the dragon in the third cover some hilarious anecdote ( Part of me wants to throw this out to the forum for hilarious inserts . . . what IS she saying? ". . . and then SHE was like . . ."). While these covers may have NOTHING to do with the content of the books themselves, they definately give a first impression. Oh sure, I'd like to read these . . . right after I get through War and Peace. I'm still interested, but the first impression knocks the book down on my list of must-reads.

The Outstretched Shadow has a Fabulous cover, and covers get better with each sequel. The characters may not be involved in action, but there is a hint of conflict: the characters are standing at attention. In addition, there's a unicorn that doesn't appear to be resting, tossing its head, or enamored with a woman; it actually looks ready to fight--I didn't even know those types of unicorns existed! These things set a powerful mood. The style of the covers is very detailed, and a bit grainy. It lends a more realistic feel to the impression . . . pulls the casual glancer into the story with it's dark, but contrasting colors. This series would be the first of Lackey's that I would pick up. It just screams tension, action, and powerful characters caught in action and plot.

500 Kingdoms . . . Do I REALLY have to explain these ones? Airy, ethereal. Light and full of pastels. The style of the covers doesn't scream anything, but whispers saccharinely. The majority of the covers are taken up by Lackey's NAME, followed closely by profiled body shots of women who seem to have everything in hand. No conflict there whatsoever, and I probably wouldn't enjoy the self-assured, dialogue of these characters. Again . . . the content might be completely different . . . but first impressions are everything. I'm lemon lawing these unless I happen to have a young daughter to read them to.

You're right . . . of the books you were looking at, there is QUITE a variance. Bear in mind however, that two of the three were co-written . . . the one that wasn't was distinct (in a way which is off-putting to your average male reader)

Glance over the other covers at that sight. The mood conveyed is pretty consistent, and though the style does differ . . . it doesn't differ much. Lots of horses. Lots of individuals standing at attention looking majestic, or defiant (in a teenage kind of way.) The characters all look the same . . . oh there are different hair colors and outfits, but a powerful story needs more than just superficial cosmetics. A cover isn't any different. Not a lot of conflict or action, nor a sense of setting. They're very passive, light, and the style isn't very unique. One would imagine that with the beginning of a new series the style and mood would change, but it doesn't. Purples, Dark Reds, Light Blues, Golds.
Valdemar, Bedlam, Bardic, Elemental Masters, Dariens Tales, 500 Kingdoms and Dragon Jousters ALL have that mood and have similar styles.

So again Swiggly, please know that my opposition is not to Mercedes Lackey, but to her cover art. I think that it pigeon holes her, and keeps a lot of potential readers away because of their first impressions. I have to agree with you about Brandon's covers (the paperback Mistborn excluded), they have interesting backgrounds and a solid focal point. They have ACTION and Conflict. The Mood and Style are intriguing. There is more emphasis on art (read story) than on title and author (read commercialism.) There is a sense of something unique about each cover. I feel like this Warbreaker cover has some serious potential to interest both male and female readers, and I'd hate for a title to counteract that. I hope I've managed to emend instead of exacerbate any offense I gave. I'm sorry if there was any confusion.

6
Brandon Sanderson / Re: More TITLES for You to Digest
« on: November 16, 2007, 01:01:36 PM »
After having an animated discussion about this (referring to the new title, not the new artwork) with Steve (NotBookstoreGuyAnymore) the other night, I feel the need to put some of our opinions onscreen.

Mythwalker is a great title . . . but not for this book.
The fact is that Spriggan's right. The majority of Brandon's books target females, and the title of MythWalker would simply topple the scales of the delicate balance of men/women interest. When I read the title for the first time I was struck by two things: First its cleverness, and second, its lack of force. Think about the two words themselves . . . a myth, and the verb to walk. Neither is all that powerful of a word. Myths conjure up SLOW images; age, time, and intangibility (a myth isn't FACT . . . it has a cloudy ethereal quality to it). And THEN we pair it with WALKING . . . a plain image. An ordinary verb. There isn't conflict in walking in the same way that there isn't solid fact to myth. It seems so bland and serene . . . and when combined with Myth, it creates a clever image in which the ghostly myth is given action . . . as though the myth is given life. But ultimately it's a rather boring, ordinary life . . . Mythwalking conjures up images of a somber task, a slow tread, a dedication which could take ages. Fascinating, yes, but it fits for a more sedate story which would be unappealing to most guys. (Interesting perhaps, but appealing?)

Slap that title along with that cover, and it will drag the book down. Men and women will be intrigued by the cover art, but the title won't have the power--the I'm-slapping-you-in-the-face-and-daring-you-to-read-me kind of power--that Warbreaker has. Guys'll be interested in what that girl is doing with that sword . . . but let's face it. She's sitting there . . . and then we're going to relate the story to "walking?" Pass. It makes the story seem to be the classic suffering woman tale. Completely Mercedes Lackey (Not that there is a problem with that, but the last thing I want is for Brandon to get pigeon-holed. Besides. . . Warbreaker has one of the more powerful male figures Brandon has used (or at least a male figure who isn't either a:intellectual or b:a complete bastard). Vasher is pure, unadulterated male. No hint of the scholar (though we hear it might have once been part of his history), or the coward, or the powerseeking male ego. Vasher is a powerful contrast to the female characters in Warbreaker (Cause as fun as the other male character is . . . he's pretty lacking in the action department as well).

Warbreaker may be a tad misleading, I was one of the first to admit it (in a similar lengthy reply,) but the fact is that it has a drawing influence. It tells the reader that stuff is going to happen here . . . and in a way, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I was sort of surprised after finishing the book at how exciting and action packed I THOUGHT it had been. There really is a great deal of suspense and intrigue . . . and one of the main character's conflicts is centered around embarrassment (the little girls got some good spunk though)--but of action there is relatively little. I've mentioned before how all of the characters are removed from the war . . . Hell. The major threatening army isn't even LIVING. The catch to all of this is the TITLE. The title gave me a rush, and primed me . . . and because I went into the book feeling that it had already excited me, I was.

I realize that the Duology will be titled Warbreaker. But we ALL know that the Duology title will be in miniscule print. I don't know how the sequel is plotted, but I'm curious as to why Warbreaker couldn't be the title of the single work, and Mythwalker the title of the set. The first would draw readers into the series, and the second just SEEMS like it should apply to a longer, more enduring effort. Does the title warbreaker recur in the second book? After all, the character has MANY names . . . so it would seem fitting that one who "walks in the Myths" should have different titles based off of different myths. I always felt the character was playing a Warbreaker in the book, but had been fulfilling many mythological roles throughout his life.

That's my 2,000 cents. I'm sure NBGA (Steve) will add anything I've missed.

(Oh, and in regard to the art, I still love the progression. Though I DO wish there was more contrast and color. Part of me also wishes ther was some hint as to the  mediterranean setting. It's such a lush, gorgeous enviornment and would really distinguish the cover from typical fantasy medieval settings.)

7
Brandon Sanderson / Amen.
« on: September 05, 2007, 12:02:17 AM »
I totally agree, Steve-not-bookstore-guy-any-longer. Well said.

8
Brandon Sanderson / Dangit.
« on: August 31, 2007, 08:25:36 AM »
I wrote a HUGE reply . . . only to have it all get lost. It was a work of ART. Geeze. Okay, here goes nothing.

Firstly, Dos Santos is fabulous. I've admired his work for a while now. Great choice, and congrats. I'm eager to see what he cooks up.

Secondly, I've got quite a bit to say about the title. It really prompted a lot of thought for me; not only when I first encountered it, but also as I read the story, and as I pondered it afterward. I'll try to be brief, however (Mostly because I just might kill myself if my reply gets lost AGAIN.)

     My overall opinion is much along the lines of Ookla and farak. It'll look great on spine and cover, and it fits the tone and feel of the story perfectly. Farak said it so well that I just have to quote it, "part mythological, part epic, and all self confident." Perfect way to put it.
     The title is brief and bold, and sparks curiousity . . . a curiousity that the story simply doesn't satisfy until near the finale. By blending it with the titles of the Returned, it loses a bit of the cliche normally associated with titles . . . this title matters, but is part of culture and not merely a plot device.
     This is one thing which made me wary when first encountering the book; it's a little ambiguous. Well of course a warbreaker "breaks wars" but what exactly does that entail? Is this something unique conceptually to the story? Is it a common thing? Will I follow the story of this individual? Is this story a heroic, regency, or epic? This latter question is primarily what made me wary . . . I didn't want to experience another story about some "long prophecied individual of the land of <insert world name here>, the savior <insert mythic title here>!!"
     As mentioned before however, this cliche is beautifully laid to rest by cleverly prolonging the readers encounter with the revelation of the identity of the Warbreaker until they've both: A) already identified him, or B) forgotten that the title is of importance. The pieces are up to the reader to put together, and not repeated endlessly on every other page. (I actually wish that a countless number of unexperienced fantasy readers will purchase Warbreaker because of its resemblance to countless other epic fantasy titles so they will learn to appreciate the brilliance of a well concieved twist of genre)
    Another problem beset me while reading Warbreaker relating to the heroic end of the spectrum: doesn't there have to be a war in order for a warbreaker to break it? Where is the war? I realized that it does arrive (and splendidly, with Brandon's usual everything-goes-to-hell-at-the-end style,) but I found the characters all removed from the gritty effects of war itself up until that last moment. Even Vivenna is really only dealing with civil unrest for most of the story. The characters, however, are engaging and the war seems so distant because I found myself drawn to the characters struggles . . . this naturally makes the war a bit more of a surprise as well. So there is a bit of a trade off there.

In general, my opinion about the title is the same as my opinion about most of Brandon's work: it leads readers in with promises of traditional fantasy, slightly modified . . . and then turns the tables on them, leaving them to wonder which promises were kept, which promises were broken, and which promises they'll trust any author (other than Brandon) to make, ever again.

I'm glad you're not considering changing it . . . I feel that any potential misunderstandings or expectations it might cause will only make the reading more enjoyable.

Pages: [1]