Robert Jordan and a few others
Lylanthwol
that either the overthrow of Eliada or Tarmon Gaidon will bring back the
excitement/interest that I had during the first few books. I don't begrudge Mr
Jordan his paycheck {after all I still buy the damn books} but I'd like to be
getting a little more for my money than rooting for one of the seemingly
endless streams of minor characters. I'm also waiting for Lanfear and Moiraine
to make their reappearance and the debunking of the idea that Rand has already
killed Ishamael. I'd really feel that Jordan went down the wrong road if his
half-baked revelations on this subject that were introduced in The Path of
Daggers panned out.
I'm now reading Goodkind's Soul of the Fire in hopes that he doesn't follow
Jordan's "Let's Pick Up The Latest Paycheck" formula. Hopes aren't all that
high.
On a brighter side, Water Sleeps by Glen Cook not only continued the powerful
story of The Black Company, but set up the next trilogy{?} quite well. I
wasn't all that thrilled with the idea of living through Sleepy's POV at first,
but as Cook does so well, curve balls quickly turn into home runs!
~John~
The Great Sci-Fi Reading Group
<A
HREF="http://members.xoom.com/Lylanthwol/Sci-Fi/sci-fi.html">http://member
s.xoom.com/Lylanthwol/Sci-Fi/sci-fi.html</A>
SF chats, Links and Yours Truly
Ewa Pawelec
> Somehow I don't think that I'm the only one still reading this series
> in hopes that either the overthrow of Eliada or Tarmon Gaidon will
> bring back the excitement/interest that I had during the first few
> books.
with louder and loder curses at the end of the reading...
> I'm now reading Goodkind's Soul of the Fire in hopes that he doesn't
> follow Jordan's "Let's Pick Up The Latest Paycheck" formula. Hopes
> aren't all that high.
No kidding? Ouch, I really _did_ hope it's the last book of the cycle...
Ewa
--
Ewa Pawelec
AEE Laboratoire National d'Hydraulique, Electricite de France
Power corrupts, but we all need electricity
Bryce
In article <19990701090003...@ng-fq1.aol.com>,
lylan...@aol.com says...
> Somehow I don't think that I'm the only one still reading this series in hopes
> that either the overthrow of Eliada or Tarmon Gaidon will bring back the
> excitement/interest that I had during the first few books. I don't begrudge Mr
> Jordan his paycheck {after all I still buy the damn books} but I'd like to be
> getting a little more for my money than rooting for one of the seemingly
> endless streams of minor characters. I'm also waiting for Lanfear and Moiraine
> to make their reappearance and the debunking of the idea that Rand has already
> killed Ishamael. I'd really feel that Jordan went down the wrong road if his
> half-baked revelations on this subject that were introduced in The Path of
> Daggers panned out.
hehe, I can understand. On the other hand, I'm enjoying the series so
much that I hope he never ends it. I think Jordan has created a
rich/complex world that whose conflicts aren't going to be tied up in a
single (or even several) books.
On that note, I've really enjoyed the George RR Martin books (Game of
Thrones and A Clash of Kings). Complex threads, much like the Jordan
books. I like his POVs, especially Tyrion's. I really like that imp for
some reason...
> I'm now reading Goodkind's Soul of the Fire in hopes that he doesn't follow
> Jordan's "Let's Pick Up The Latest Paycheck" formula. Hopes aren't all that
> high.
I read his first book (Wizard's First Rule), and couldn't get the idea
out of my mind that Terry was a closet pedophile. Can't bring myself to
pick up the remainder. Maybe someone can post a reason why I should, like
the others are better, etc.
--
Bryce
I'm really easy to get along with once you people learn to worship me.
Ewa Pawelec
> I read his first book (Wizard's First Rule), and couldn't get the idea
> out of my mind that Terry was a closet pedophile.
Brian Love
bfis...@tampabay.rr.comNOSPAM (Bryce) wrote:
> hehe, I can understand. On the other hand, I'm enjoying the series so
> much that I hope he never ends it. I think Jordan has created a
> rich/complex world that whose conflicts aren't going to be tied up in a
> single (or even several) books.
That's one hope that won't be in vain. It's clear that Jordan will keep
cranking these out till he's dead. We can only hope that he doesn't pull
an elronn.
--
Brian Love
Blizzard Entertainment
Bryce
ew...@galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl says...
> Bryce wrote:
> > I read his first book (Wizard's First Rule), and couldn't get the idea
> > out of my mind that Terry was a closet pedophile.
> Why????
Can't remember exact details, since I read it shortly after it was
released (at least 3years ago..?). But I do remember the scene where the
evil guy has the kid buried to his neck and does mean things to him.
Bryce
says...
RJ has said that he know's how its going to end, and that all threads
won't be completely closed off. Said that doesn't happen in real life,
and won't happen in the books. Also said he's at least 3-4 books from
finishing the series. Of course Path of Daggers was supposed to contain
more, but he found that if he continued writing, he'd have written a book
twice the size, hence the abrupt finish to the POD. At that rate, he's
got 6-8 more ;-)
Mark Hanson
as when I finished The Shadow Rising, which I think is the best so far. Part of the
ho-hum attitude came with the @#$%& *two and a half year* pause between COS and
POD. Jesus: hacks like Anne McCaffrey, Piers Anthony and Harry Turtledove could
churn out a dozen books in that time; what's Jordan's problem?
Too bad; it's a really good series. He's obviously researched his plot to within an
inch of its life. He never throws in anything arbitrary; everything means
something, everything is important, and eventually you find out what it meant. All
his hints pay out, and there are a lot of hints. He must have thousands of pages of
notes, to be able to keep track of it all.
Realy good, but not great. Why? Because as much as I like pretty much all of the
characters, they're all really annoying. They're whiny, ignorany, petulent brats.
About two years have passed since the story began, and none of them have matured
emotionally -- they're all still the same high-school-level idiots we first met.
The boys (Rand, Mat & Perrin): they're pig-headed, mulish chauvenists; none of them
understand girls, and comment on this frequently; they think they're too strong and
brave to need help, then find out they do (repeat as necessary). The girls (Egwene,
Elayne, Nynaeve, Faile): they're self-centered, arrogant bitches, who take frequent
time-outs to be warm, loving, caring friends; they just don't understand boys, and
comment on it frequently; they think they're too smart and brave to need help, then
find out they do (repeat as necessary). Ad infinitum.
Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
desperate need of an editor. The last three books are cases in point. LOC, COS &
POD have between them contained about enough action and plot to fill a book and a
half, and yet it has still taken nearly four years for them to come out.
And yet despite all that, I love the series, and will keep buying the books until
it's over (whenever that is). It's a fantastic story with some of the best, most
exciting battle scenes I've ever read; despite their flaws, fully-rounded,
completely sympathetic characters; and some of the best descriptions of evil in a
fantasy work I've ever seen. I love it, and kind of hate myself because I do.
I started reading the first book in Terry Goodkind's series (whichever one that
is), and put it down in disgust after about 5 pages. It was so badly written, with
such horrible dialogue, that I felt I was reading the novelization of someone's
AD&D game. Yuck.
Mark
xx
>I read his first book (Wizard's First Rule), and couldn't get the idea
>pick up the remainder. Maybe someone can post a reason why I should, like
>the others are better, etc.
>
Maybe not better, though I think I did like the second book more so
than the first, perhaps the best of the series..., anyway there isn't
really much in the way of children that I can recall in the remaining
books.
That part with the boy in the sand was a bit over done I thought, but
then, what would have made it any better if it had been a grown man or
women?
TokenRing
wrote:
>
>Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
>dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
>desperate need of an editor. The last three books are cases in point. LOC, COS &
>POD have between them contained about enough action and plot to fill a book and a
>half, and yet it has still taken nearly four years for them to come out.
>
>
This is the worst part of the book as far as I am concerned.
Descriptions that long a rarely necessary, and as repetitious as these
are does show are writers skill (as in CUT and PASTE). To take up so
much verbage about clothes....
The series is a fairly interesting story that is better in its concept
than its telling.
John S. Novak, III
>Somehow I don't think that I'm the only one still reading this series in hopes
>that either the overthrow of Eliada or Tarmon Gaidon will bring back the
>excitement/interest that I had during the first few books.
You will probably be somewhat happier in rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan,
as long as you make a cogent and polite argument as you have here.
Not many people in this group are going to want to start this
discussion here.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
Ian Galbraith
:Somehow I don't think that I'm the only one still reading this series in hopes
:that either the overthrow of Eliada or Tarmon Gaidon will bring back the
:excitement/interest that I had during the first few books. I don't begrudge Mr
:Jordan his paycheck {after all I still buy the damn books} but I'd like to be
:getting a little more for my money than rooting for one of the seemingly
:endless streams of minor characters. I'm also waiting for Lanfear and Moiraine
I suggest you reread The Path of Daggers, a certain someone has almost
certainly made a reappearance.
[snip]
Be Seeing You
--
Ian Galbraith
Email: igalb...@ozonline.com.au ICQ#: 7849631
"I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination
is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination
encircles the world." - Albert Einstein
Thomas Bagwell
news:377bf404....@news.azstarnet.com...
It's Jordan's relationships that get to me...particularly his
depiction of every female character in the book and how the men react
to them. The women are invariably arrogant, sarcastic and
condescending, while the men react in a confused sulky daze when
around them.
This was old by the end of the first book, by the end of eight books
it's infuriating. I haven't been able to force myself to read the
latest one yet. At first it was because my normal practice would be
to re-read the previous books...this is becoming too daunting to
contemplate. I'm trying to work up the interest to dive into it
anyway...as soon as I finish my 'to be re-read' stack, probably...
Tom Bagwell
TokenRing
previous book before reading the newest one? You must have eyes of
steel (or something like that!) to be able to read that much in a
humanely possible time frame. Myself it takes over a month to read
one of Jordan's books. I'd be spending near half a year preparing for
the later ones!
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999 00:43:00 -0500, "Thomas Bagwell"
<tnba...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>...
Ewa Pawelec
> Can't remember exact details, since I read it shortly after it was
> released (at least 3years ago..?). But I do remember the scene where the
> evil guy has the kid buried to his neck and does mean things to him.
Keeper. _That_ kind of pedophilia you have in mind? "Philia" in that
moment doesn't fit. Yes, one of the othes evil guys _is_ a homosexual
pedophile. But I don't remember any description of the act - and, what's
more, how you connect it with the author? So most of the SF authors ho
describe murderers in their stories are murderers themselves???
Dorothy J Heydt
Ewa Pawelec <ew...@galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>.....Yes, one of the othes evil guys _is_ a homosexual
>pedophile. But I don't remember any description of the act - and, what's
>more, how you connect it with the author? So most of the SF authors ho
>describe murderers in their stories are murderers themselves???
Sounds like a variant on the recuring troll that reads, "Having
read {Title}, I can't help wondering, is {Author} gay?"
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Ewa Pawelec
> Sounds like a variant on the recuring troll that reads, "Having
> read {Title}, I can't help wondering, is {Author} gay?"
:-)))
Andy Mulhearn
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> Sounds like a variant on the recuring troll that reads, "Having
>> read {Title}, I can't help wondering, is {Author} gay?"
>LOL. Thanks. I'm new to this newsgroup and I did take it a bit seriously
>:-)))
>
>Ewa
The last one I recall, before I last dropped out of rasw, was Arthur C
Clarke. Very nasty that one and it all hung in the use of the word
boy, IIRC. In Sri Lanka this is appears to be used to refer to any
male person younger than you. As Clarke is rather advanced in years,
it could be applied to about 3.5 billion people.
Unfortunately there are some who used this to smear him, both the
gutter press in the UK and on Usenet.
Before that it was The door into Summer by Robert Heinlein, and there
isn't even anything hidden in the book, never mind overt references,
to lead one to this conclusion.
--
Andy
"Oh Mister Vandemar," he said enjoying the sound of the words, as he enjoyed
the sound of all words, "If you prick us, do we not bleed?"
Mr. Vandemar pondered this for a moment, in the dark. Then he said, perfectly
accurately, "No".
Neil Gaiman - Neverwhere.
John S. Novak, III
>>You will probably be somewhat happier in rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan,
>>as long as you make a cogent and polite argument as you have here.
>>Not many people in this group are going to want to start this
>>discussion here.
>
No, I'm lying to you.
Sheesh.
Lylanthwol
>certainly made a reappearance.
I can only assume that you're referring to the overly powerful newcomer to the
Forsaken scene. To assume that she {or anyone else for that matter} is Lanfear
is a bit premature in my opinion. First, it's been said in POD that the "dead"
Forsaken are being restored as a member of a different sex. Secondly, until
it's stated specifically who is {or rather was} who, I wouldn't bet on
anything. Thirdly, Lanfear and Moiraine disappeared through a Ter'angreal.
There is no specific evidence that either was killed. And lastly, Lanfear was
a particularly effective character. It would be a severe mistake to kill her
off with what??? a dozen or so books left?? :)
Now of course, you may beg to differ with me... but as we all know... it's a
free {or at least inexpensive} Internet
Lylanthwol
>as long as you make a cogent and polite argument as you have here.
>Not many people in this group are going to want to start this
>discussion here.
Ya really think so?
Justin Bacon
<tnba...@earthlink.net> writes:
>It's Jordan's relationships that get to me...particularly his
>depiction of every female character in the book and how the men react
>to them. The women are invariably arrogant, sarcastic and
>condescending, while the men react in a confused sulky daze when
>around them.
You're oversimplifying terribly.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
(TokenRing) writes:
>This is the worst part of the book as far as I am concerned.
>Descriptions that long a rarely necessary, and as repetitious as these
>are does show are writers skill (as in CUT and PASTE). To take up so
>much verbage about clothes....
I don't think its cut&paste, I think it's the fact that after eight books he's
begun to run out of ways of describing very similar things -- but isn't
comfortable with simply NOT describing them.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
writes:
>Jesus: hacks like Anne McCaffrey, Piers Anthony and Harry Turtledove could
>churn out a dozen books in that time; what's Jordan's problem?
Lemme see if I've got this straight: You're complaint is that Jordan wasn't
acting like a hack?
>Realy good, but not great. Why? Because as much as I like pretty much all of
the
>characters, they're all really annoying. They're whiny, ignorany, petulent
brats.
About the only ones who still have this effect on me are the girls -- esp. the
fact they refuse to trust Rand. Elayne has the most hope here, while Nynaeve
seems to have actively regressed (although that seems to have more to do with
the fact we know more about her now). The guys, OTOH, have matured nicely since
the beginning. Rand, in particular, impresses me. Mat still has a way to go
(although as I noted elsewhere I have to read POD).
>I started reading the first book in Terry Goodkind's series (whichever one
that
>is), and put it down in disgust after about 5 pages. It was so badly written,
with
>such horrible dialogue, that I felt I was reading the novelization of
someone's
>AD&D game. Yuck.
Your lucky. I finished it. You missed out on:
1. Two mysterious barriers which: (a) Had to go up no more than a generation
ago because there are people alive who remember them going up; yet (b) There
are significant numbers of people who do not know this and refuse to believe
that there is anything beyond them; and (c) have ways through them which,
conveniently, very few people use... except of course our heroes.
2. 100 pages of needless sex, rape, and S&M -- inserted apparently because
Goodkind needed more pages. What's worse is this comes just before the obvious
resolution of the story, so you're basically put on hold.
3. A world which seems to have been constructed solely so that this adventure
can take place (#1 is kind of a subset of this).
There are also some good points, although often you could spot them coming from
a mile away.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
>hehe, I can understand. On the other hand, I'm enjoying the series so
>much that I hope he never ends it. I think Jordan has created a
>rich/complex world that whose conflicts aren't going to be tied up in a
>single (or even several) books.
I agree. I have yet to read PATH OF DAGGERS (you know how it can be), but I
have yet to dislike any of the books (except the first 250 pages of the first
one). I love this type of extensive politically-oriented plotting.
>I read his first book (Wizard's First Rule), and couldn't get the idea
>out of my mind that Terry was a closet pedophile. Can't bring myself to
>pick up the remainder. Maybe someone can post a reason why I should, like
>the others are better, etc.
I have to admit that Mr. Goodkind lost all my respect as an author with that
book when he inserted 100 pages of needless sex, rape, and S&M (I say needless
because if you remove those pages and the S&M character introduced in them the
plot is not affected AT ALL). He had already taken hits because his world was
constructed in a way which made no logical sense (beyond "it has to be this way
in order to tell the story I want to tell"), and that pretty much polished
things off for me.
But pedophile? I don't understand where you got that from.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Thomas Bagwell
news:19990703044247...@ngol07.aol.com...
Yes, I am. It is, nonetheless, the impression I continually get when
reading the books and when thinking about them in retrospect. The
exceptions to the above are few and far between, and usually it's only
the intensitiy of the above that varies.
Tom B.
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> It's Jordan's relationships that get to me...particularly his
> depiction of every female character in the book and how the men react
> to them. The women are invariably arrogant, sarcastic and
> condescending, while the men react in a confused sulky daze when
> around them.
>
seem to be incompetent boobs who confuse the women with their
stupidity.
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You two can be an ordained minister: http://ulc.org/ulc
"L'an mil neuf cens nonante neuf sept mois,
Du ciel viendra un grand Roi Deffraieur.
Resusciter le grand Roi d'Angolmois,
Avant que Mars regner par bonheur."
Michel d'Nostradame Century X:LXXII
Reverend Sean O'Hara
Lylanthwol wrote:
>
> >I suggest you reread The Path of Daggers, a certain someone has almost
> >certainly made a reappearance.
>
> I can only assume that you're referring to the overly powerful newcomer to the
> Forsaken scene. To assume that she {or anyone else for that matter} is Lanfear
> is a bit premature in my opinion. First, it's been said in POD that the "dead"
> Forsaken are being restored as a member of a different sex.
You're misreading the glossary. Aran'gar happens to be the
reincarnation of Agenor (or maybe it's Balthamel). The glossary states
that because of that, it's premature to speculate on who Moridin and
Cyndane are. However, Moridin is almost certainly Ishy reborn, not that
all the Forsaken are changing sex. Note that Aran'gar, while in a
woman's body, still channels saidin like a man. His companion, Osan'gar
(Balthamel (or maybe it was Agenor (they appeared for ten pages before
dying, so I can't tell them apart))) is in a man's body, and still
channels saidin. For that matter, when they appeared in LoC, there
were no dead female Forsaken for Osan'gar to be reincarnated from.
Now, there are two other reincarnated Forsaken: Cyndane and Moridin.
Moridin is almost certainly Ishy, which leaves Cyndane for Lanfear
(All other dead Forsaken were Balefired, except for Sammael. But
there's evidence for Cyndane's existence in Crown of Swords (ie:
Moridin's second mindtrap) long before Sammy disappeared in Shaddar
Logoth.).
There's a detailed discussion of this in the WOT FAQ at:
> Secondly, until
> it's stated specifically who is {or rather was} who, I wouldn't bet on
> anything. Thirdly, Lanfear and Moiraine disappeared through a Ter'angreal.
> There is no specific evidence that either was killed.
Until Cyndane's appearance, that's true. Again, the Jordan FAQ provides
plenty of proof that Cyndane is Lanfear.
> And lastly, Lanfear was
> a particularly effective character. It would be a severe mistake to kill her
> off with what??? a dozen or so books left?? :)
>
But if she's reincarnated then she hasn't been killed off. For that
matter, you can make the same argument about Ishy, who was far more
effective than Lanfear.
Pete McCutchen
(Bryce) wrote:
>
>On that note, I've really enjoyed the George RR Martin books (Game of
>Thrones and A Clash of Kings). Complex threads, much like the Jordan
>books. I like his POVs, especially Tyrion's. I really like that imp for
>some reason...
I think that comparing Robert Jordan to George R.R. Martin is a bit
like comparing a Yugo to a Porsche.
Pete McCutchen
<ew...@galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>Power corrupts, but we all need electricity
What a sig!
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>
>I started reading the first book in Terry Goodkind's series (whichever one that
>is), and put it down in disgust after about 5 pages. It was so badly written, with
>such horrible dialogue, that I felt I was reading the novelization of someone's
>AD&D game. Yuck.
Well, if you'd waited a couple of hundred pages, you'd have thought
that you were reading a novelization of somebody's night at the local
S&M club. Sort of a change of pace, there.
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>Well, I'm still buying, and still reading, but with nowhere near as much enthusiasm
>as when I finished The Shadow Rising, which I think is the best so far. Part of the
>ho-hum attitude came with the @#$%& *two and a half year* pause between COS and
>POD. Jesus: hacks like Anne McCaffrey, Piers Anthony and Harry Turtledove could
>churn out a dozen books in that time; what's Jordan's problem?
Sorry to respond twice to the same post, but let me get this straight:
you think that Harry Turtledove is more of a hack than Robert Jordan?
Some of his series' are a bit overlong, but I don't think of him as a
hack.
Sadly, in her later years, Anne McCaffrey probably earned that title.
But her earlier work is actually readable. The first couple of Pern
books were entertaining; it was only when she got sequalitis that she
ran into problems.
As for Piers, well, I can't argue with you on that one.
Ewa Pawelec
author. The other I liked there was, for example (I can misquote it,
I've read it some time ago):
"Pigs have wings, making them hard to catch"
Ewa
--
Ewa Pawelec
AEE Laboratoire National d'Hydraulique, Electricite de France
Power corrupts, but we all need electricity
to answer by email, change milky_way into galaxy
Elizabeth Blatt
<ewap@milky_way.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
> It's taken from the book "Archer's Goon", but I cannot recall the
> author.
It's by Diana Wynn Jones.
--Elizabeth
Jordan Mendenhall
Or a prelude to a camaro. Both of those are cars, but they're different in
many ways, just as Jordan and Martin are. Jordan writes more fantastical
fantasy while Martin gets into the nitty-gritty realism fantastical. I
think they're both great authors and really shouldn't be compared.
-JM
Samuel Paik
> On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 16:38:54 +0200, Ewa Pawelec
> <ew...@galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>
> >Power corrupts, but we all need electricity
>
> What a sig!
There is a similar quote in _Komarr_
"And so it continued around the table: more than Miles had
ever wanted to know about Komarran terraforming, interspersed
with oblique, and not so oblique, pleas for increased Imperial
funding. And heat and light. *Power corrupts, but we want
energy.*". (p.46, hardcover edition)
--
Samuel S. Paik | http://www.webnexus.com/users/paik/
3D and multimedia, architecture and implementation
Solyent Green is kitniyot!
Brother Ike
Thomas Bagwell <tnba...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>This was old by the end of the first book, by the end of eight books
>latest one yet. At first it was because my normal practice would be
>to re-read the previous books...this is becoming too daunting to
>contemplate. I'm trying to work up the interest to dive into it
>anyway...as soon as I finish my 'to be re-read' stack, probably...
>
>Tom Bagwell
I was doing the same thing for the first 4 or 5, then decided to just
wait 'till the whole thing came out and was done before reading strait
through cover to cover. Saved my sanity that way :)
--
ike porter
ucs systems group my thoughts alone
picture yourself in a boat on a river
hubci...@earthlink.net
Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote:
> I started reading the first book in Terry Goodkind's series (whichever
one that
> is), and put it down in disgust after about 5 pages. It was so badly
written, with
> such horrible dialogue, that I felt I was reading the novelization of
someone's
> AD&D game. Yuck.
I also put down Wizard's First Rule (though I think it took me a couple
of chapters). Besides the horrible writing (particularly that godawful
political speech at the beginning that the main character's brother
gives), I could definitely sense an underlying sexism. The world was as
poorly described as L.E. Modesitt's awful Magic of Recluse, which was
bad in different ways.
-Jeff
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jordan Mendenhall
> On Thu, 01 Jul 1999 18:10:53 -0400, Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >I started reading the first book in Terry Goodkind's series (whichever one that
> >is), and put it down in disgust after about 5 pages. It was so badly written, with
> >such horrible dialogue, that I felt I was reading the novelization of someone's
> >AD&D game. Yuck.
>
> Well, if you'd waited a couple of hundred pages, you'd have thought
> that you were reading a novelization of somebody's night at the local
> S&M club. Sort of a change of pace, there.
Truly. I actually -did- struggle to the end of that one and even tried to get through
the next hoping that something more interesting would happen.
-JM
Mark Hanson
hubci...@earthlink.net wrote:
> I also put down Wizard's First Rule (though I think it took me a couple
> of chapters). Besides the horrible writing (particularly that godawful
> political speech at the beginning that the main character's brother
> gives), I could definitely sense an underlying sexism. The world was as
> poorly described as L.E. Modesitt's awful Magic of Recluse, which was
> bad in different ways.
Twice I've tried to read Magic of Recluse -- and twice I've failed. It
wasn't so much it was bad, as it was just really, really boring.
Mark
Lylanthwol
Thomas Bagwell
news:19990711011010...@ng-bg1.aol.com...
> I suppose no one here would care to comment on the Black Company eh?
> ~John~
Actually, the Black Company has been discussed quite a bit in the
past. Was there anything specific you were looking for comments on?
Tom B.
Justin Bacon
writes:
>I was doing the same thing for the first 4 or 5, then decided to just
>wait 'till the whole thing came out and was done before reading strait
>through cover to cover. Saved my sanity that way :)
I was going to do that (although I started just two months before #7 came out
-- so I was able to nail that on in sequence on my first read-through).
Unfortunately this thread has weakened my resolve and I just finished a
marathon read of EYE OF THE WORLD which is even better the second time through
now that I can see all of the foreshadowing. Thanks a lot guys. ;-)
On a disparate note: I am interested in the early construction of the series. I
know that Jordan has noted elsewhere that he planned the series so that, if it
wasn't panning out, he could end it after three and make it a trilogy (you can
see how easy it would have been for Ba'alzamon to really BE the Dark One at the
end of Book Three). I have noted, in re-reading EOTW, however, that the series
would easily have ended up being just one book. Make Rand realize he might be
the Dragon when Moiraine catches up to him Caemlyn, have him agonize about that
through the Blight, and have the final confrontation in this book actually BE
the final confrontation. It would obviously be less satisfying, and would leave
a lot of threads open (just as the ending after Book Three would have done),
but it would have worked at a purely technical level. Jordan left himself
plenty of escape hatches, it seems.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net (Pete McCutchen) writes:
>Sorry to respond twice to the same post, but let me get this straight:
>you think that Harry Turtledove is more of a hack than Robert Jordan?
>Some of his series' are a bit overlong, but I don't think of him as a
>hack.
>
>Sadly, in her later years, Anne McCaffrey probably earned that title.
>But her earlier work is actually readable. The first couple of Pern
>books were entertaining; it was only when she got sequalitis that she
>ran into problems.
>
>As for Piers, well, I can't argue with you on that one.
It's interesting because with all of these authors (except Turtledove, who I
have not read enough of to have an opinion either way) things are inverted.
I cannot read Jordan's early work (read: Conan novels) for love or money. I
consider the Wheel of Time to be quite excellent.
I consider the early work of both McCaffrey and Anthony to be quite excellent
(the first five to eight Xanth books are quite entertaining; the early Pern
stuff is exceptional). The later stuff is more than disappointing (Anthony
started rechurning the same Xanth plot over and over and over again; McCaffrey
wrote the Dolphins of Peron for god's sake!).
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
<jor...@earthlink.net> writes:
>Truly. I actually -did- struggle to the end of that one and even tried to get
>through
>the next hoping that something more interesting would happen.
>
If it hadn't been for the bizarre and needless sexual perversions I probably
would have given the second one a go despite the pathetic worldbuilding of the
first (it was like my first attempt at a D&D campaign world in sixth grade)...
but after the sexual perversions were actually allowed to completely distort
the plot with a completely pointless diversion that went on and on and on I
simply wasn't willing to give Goodkind a second try.
I have difficulty believing this book would even have been published if it
wasn't for Jordan (in truth, I picked it up myself because I was looking for
something to turn to after reading the last extant volume of WOT).
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Justin Bacon
<tnba...@earthlink.net> writes:
>Justin Bacon <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:19990703044247...@ngol07.aol.com...
>> In article <7lhjvu$jaq$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "Thomas
>Bagwell"
>> <tnba...@earthlink.net> writes:
>>
>> >It's Jordan's relationships that get to me...particularly his
>> >depiction of every female character in the book and how the men
>react
>> >to them. The women are invariably arrogant, sarcastic and
>> >condescending, while the men react in a confused sulky daze when
>> >around them.
>>
>> You're oversimplifying terribly.
>
>Yes, I am. It is, nonetheless, the impression I continually get when
>reading the books and when thinking about them in retrospect. The
>exceptions to the above are few and far between, and usually it's only
>the intensitiy of the above that varies.
Counter-examples on the Feminine Side: Moiraine, Min, the original Amyrlin Seat
Counter-examples on the Masculine Side: Lan, Rand (later on, although he's
still a little out of his depth with being in love with three different women
-- the poor sod)
I will admit, however, that the Perrin-Mat-Rand "I bet the other guys would
know how to handle this" got a little tired after the first book (particularly
when he decided to add Mat into the original Perrin-Rand dichotomy).
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Jordan Mendenhall
A common joke on WoT boards that. You can also include some of the Forsaken
females on the Counter-example list.
-JM
Jordan Mendenhall
> On a disparate note: I am interested in the early construction of the series. I
> know that Jordan has noted elsewhere that he planned the series so that, if it
> wasn't panning out, he could end it after three and make it a trilogy (you can
> see how easy it would have been for Ba'alzamon to really BE the Dark One at the
> end of Book Three). I have noted, in re-reading EOTW, however, that the series
> would easily have ended up being just one book. Make Rand realize he might be
> the Dragon when Moiraine catches up to him Caemlyn, have him agonize about that
> through the Blight, and have the final confrontation in this book actually BE
> the final confrontation. It would obviously be less satisfying, and would leave
> a lot of threads open (just as the ending after Book Three would have done),
> but it would have worked at a purely technical level. Jordan left himself
> plenty of escape hatches, it seems.
I think that he had the great foresight to do it that way. Most series don't go
past a trilogy, and those that do aren't as long as Jordan's books are. He took a
gamble with the popularity of the series and it paid off somewhat. Hopefully,
he'll finish soon so as not to use up all the respect he has earned.
-JM
Vance McAlister
Jordan Mendenhall wrote in message
>I think that he had the great foresight to do it that way. Most series
don't go
>past a trilogy, and those that do aren't as long as Jordan's books are. He
took a
>gamble with the popularity of the series and it paid off somewhat.
Hopefully,
>he'll finish soon so as not to use up all the respect he has earned.
Much too late for that. He lost my respect and that of many others when it
became obvious he was milking the series at the expense of the plot and
pacing.
Pete McCutchen
>>
>>Sadly, in her later years, Anne McCaffrey probably earned that title.
>>But her earlier work is actually readable. The first couple of Pern
>>books were entertaining; it was only when she got sequalitis that she
>>ran into problems.
>>
>>As for Piers, well, I can't argue with you on that one.
>
>It's interesting because with all of these authors (except Turtledove, who I
>have not read enough of to have an opinion either way) things are inverted.
>
>I cannot read Jordan's early work (read: Conan novels) for love or money. I
>consider the Wheel of Time to be quite excellent.
I can read Jordan's Conan books as what they were: mildly entertaining
Howard pastiches. The Wheel of Overtime, I find, well, pointless. I
thought the first book was unreadable; I cannot imagine plowing
through eight or nine of them. Or whatever they're up to.
>
>I consider the early work of both McCaffrey and Anthony to be quite excellent
>(the first five to eight Xanth books are quite entertaining; the early Pern
>stuff is exceptional). The later stuff is more than disappointing (Anthony
>started rechurning the same Xanth plot over and over and over again; McCaffrey
>wrote the Dolphins of Peron for god's sake!).
I haven't read that much Anthony, but what I read I didn't like. With
McCaffrey, I agree wholeheartedly.
Gavin Williams
<ewap@milky_way.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>Pete McCutchen wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 16:38:54 +0200, Ewa Pawelec
>> <ew...@galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl> wrote:
>>
>> >Power corrupts, but we all need electricity
>>
>> What a sig!
>It's taken from the book "Archer's Goon", but I cannot recall the
>author. The other I liked there was, for example (I can misquote it,
>I've read it some time ago):
>"Pigs have wings, making them hard to catch"
Good old Diane Wynne Jones.....
--
Remove the blocks from my name to reply
Bryan Stout
>Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
>dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
>desperate need of an editor. The last three books are cases in point. LOC, COS &
>POD have between them contained about enough action and plot to fill a book and a
>half, and yet it has still taken nearly four years for them to come out.
This is something I've noticed in general the past few years. I
recently read _Shadow of Albion_ by Andre Norton and Mary somebody (my
apologies to her for forgetting her name). I agree with the blurb on
the back that said the book was a guilty pleasure -- I wanted to
continue reading it to see what would happen, even though the book had
several weaknesses. (If it would were more solid, it would be an
unashamed pleasure rather than a guilty one.) One weakness was the
infodump early on -- sentences and paragraphs would have extensive
phrases summarizing who the different characters were, what their
pasts were, and how they interrelated. It made my head swim.
A lesser weakness IMO was its lengthy descriptions of clothing. Well,
I'm not sure it's a weakness, and I'm not opposed to knowing more
about the clothing, but here it seemed to interrupt the narrative
flow.
I've recently noticed that Bujold often describes clothing, too,
though it doesn't seem to interrupt the narrative. It's smoothly
enough included that I now see I have often read over them without
even realizing I had read them (I would sometimes notice them on
rereading).
Is this interest or lack of it in clothing some sort of guy-girl
thing? (Is Robert Jordan's interest in it a counter-example or an
exception?) I do confess that when I was a kid I simply could not
understand my female cousins getting excited about receiving clothes
for Christmas; I now can be happy about getting clothes myself, but
it's more a pragmatic than an aesthetic pleasure.
Bryan
Bryan Stout
My own enjoyment has waned with the last couple of volumes, but I will
finish the series. But I think milking the public isn't the whole
truth. For one thing, writers often put much in their initial
versions of stories that later gets left on the cutting room floor; it
can get put back in if the author is popular enough (e.g. Stephen
King's _The Stand_), or never cut out in the first place.
For another, I think this is Jordan's favorite length to work with. A
few years ago he was interviewed in a local radio talk show about his
latest installment in the series, and I called and asked who his
favorite authors were. I forget his answers for mainstream
literature, but I do remember that his favorite SF authors all tended
to write mammoth volumes (I think Tad Williams and C.M.Forester (sp??)
were among them, but I'm too fuzzy on this to rely on).
Still, I do agree that the series is feeling increasingly padded; I
wish that trend would reverse (as a whole thread commented on
recently).
Regards,
Bryan
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>This is something I've noticed in general the past few years. I
>recently read _Shadow of Albion_ by Andre Norton and Mary somebody (my
>apologies to her for forgetting her name).
Rosemary Edghill. Which is a pen name for eluki bes shahar.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 4/24/99
Vance McAlister
movies. I have no problem with that. My real gripe is that I get the
impression that he had some concept for the series plotting which would
have ended it around the 4th or 5th book at the latest, but when he saw
the money he was making, he made a concious choice to adjust the plot to
extend the series. This is never a good idea, and the quality has
decreased dramatically. He is repeating stock dialogue, relationship
settings (never a strong point), descriptions of action or feeling, etc.
My feeling is that with Hobb, Martin, Kay, Brust, etc, out there writing
great stuff, why should I bother reading the same 800 page novel 3 or 4
more times? My reading time is limited and he has dropped so far down
on my list I doubt I will ever bother. There may be worst writers, but
there are also many who are so much better.
Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:7mcv4s$3b9$5...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net...
Dorothy J Heydt
Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>My own enjoyment has waned with the last couple of volumes, but I will
>finish the series.
You mean, you hope you will. This presupposes that *Jordan* will
finish the series.
For my part, as all here know, I quit reading after Book Two,
Chapter One.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Dorothy J Heydt
Vance McAlister <v.mca...@ejgd.com> wrote:
>
>My feeling is that with Hobb, Martin, Kay, Brust, etc, out there writing
>great stuff, why should I bother reading the same 800 page novel 3 or 4
>more times? My reading time is limited and he has dropped so far down
>on my list I doubt I will ever bother.
Well spoken.
As for me, I'm an old lady and have discovered that life is too
short to spend any of it reading what I don't enjoy. (This
doesn't count stuff waded through in the name of research.)
Rather than read something new that doesn't suit me, I'll reread
something old that does.
Dorothy J Heydt
Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>>Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
>>dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
>>desperate need of an editor.
He's got an editor. I forget her name. She's his wife. But we
must never lose sight of the fact that he writes like that
BECAUSE PEOPLE BUY IT. Why should she cut out his fashion-show
narrative when there are so many people out there willing to pay
good money for it?
Brenda
Bryan Stout wrote:
> Is this interest or lack of it in clothing some sort of guy-girl
> thing? (Is Robert Jordan's interest in it a counter-example or an
> exception?) I do confess that when I was a kid I simply could not
> understand my female cousins getting excited about receiving clothes
> for Christmas; I now can be happy about getting clothes myself, but
> it's more a pragmatic than an aesthetic pleasure.
>
> Bryan
There are men who are passionately interested in clothes and shopping. They are
uncommon but by no means unknown. Many of the major couturiers are male, for
instance. A more minor example would be my father, who enjoys going to the mall and
buying clothes, for himself or for us. It was great when he went to Argentina and got
a fantastic discount on fur coats.
Having said that, though, I think that lengthy description of clothing in fiction is
about as useful as lengthy description of armaments -- only use as necessary.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough, author of HOW LIKE A GOD, from Tor Books
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
GCU Cultural Attache
Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> asserted
>"Vance McAlister" <v.mca...@ejgd.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Jordan Mendenhall wrote in message
>>>I think that he had the great foresight to do it that way. Most series
>>don't go
>>>past a trilogy, and those that do aren't as long as Jordan's books are. He
>>took a
>>>gamble with the popularity of the series and it paid off somewhat.
>>Hopefully,
>>>he'll finish soon so as not to use up all the respect he has earned.
>
>
>>Much too late for that. He lost my respect and that of many others when it
>>became obvious he was milking the series at the expense of the plot and
>>pacing.
>
>finish the series.
You =hope= you will .. how many more are you willing to wait for, &/or
how much do you have the author's life insured for 8>.
<snip>
GCU Cultural Attache:
David Navarro
>
> In article <7mcur3$3b9$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>, bst...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> >Is this interest or lack of it in clothing some sort of guy-girl
> >thing?
>
> descriptions (or just about *any* clothing description, really) highly
> annoying, and last time I checked, I'm a girl.
>
> On the other hand, I also have no interest in what people are wearing in
> the real world (as long as they're wearing *something*); I never notice
> clothes, so being forced to notice them when I'm (hopefully) caught up in a
> book is quite distracting. If I cared what the characters were wearing,
> I'd wait for the movie/graphic novel/other-visual-format!
>
Besides, detailed descriptions of clothing can really date a book. One
of the problems I had with Gregory Benford's _Artifact_ (apart from it
being complete crap) was that after a few descriptions of clothing, my
mental image of the action turned into an episode of "Starsky &
Hutch", which certainly didn't help.
--
__________________________________________________
David Navarro http://www.alcaudon.com
__________________________________________________
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Brenda
David Navarro wrote:
> Jennifer Barber wrote:
> >
> > In article <7mcur3$3b9$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>, bst...@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > >Is this interest or lack of it in clothing some sort of guy-girl
> > >thing?
> >
> > I don't think so. At least, I, too, find long, detailed clothing
> > descriptions (or just about *any* clothing description, really) highly
> > annoying, and last time I checked, I'm a girl.
> >
> > On the other hand, I also have no interest in what people are wearing in
> > the real world (as long as they're wearing *something*); I never notice
> > clothes, so being forced to notice them when I'm (hopefully) caught up in a
> > book is quite distracting. If I cared what the characters were wearing,
> > I'd wait for the movie/graphic novel/other-visual-format!
> >
>
> Besides, detailed descriptions of clothing can really date a book. One
> of the problems I had with Gregory Benford's _Artifact_ (apart from it
> being complete crap) was that after a few descriptions of clothing, my
> mental image of the action turned into an episode of "Starsky &
> Hutch", which certainly didn't help.
>
> --
OTOH, -no- description is not good either. I had to read a batch of stories last
month in which none of the characters were described at all. I amused myself by
making them all look like John Belushi on a bad day.
William December Starr
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
In article <7mcur3$3b9$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>,
Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>>Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
>>dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
>>desperate need of an editor.
> He's got an editor. I forget her name. She's his wife. But we
> must never lose sight of the fact that he writes like that
> BECAUSE PEOPLE BUY IT. Why should she cut out his fashion-show
> narrative when there are so many people out there willing to pay
> good money for it?
But how can we, or he or she, tell whether it's a "because of" or
"in spite of" relationship?
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>
LynnJorge
In article <378A2FF0...@erols.com>, Brenda wrote:
>Having said that, though, I think that lengthy description of clothing
>in fiction is about as useful as lengthy description of armaments --
>only use as necessary.
Depends on what you're good at. I can read [take] C. S. Friedman's
writing about clothes for a lot longer than other comparable authors,
but then just look at what she did [does?] for a living before her
books took off.
I can think of authors who write about food and I can read long
passages on just the spices. Weapons, same thing. Though the only
person who I can bring to mind who I regularly read his weapons
writings is Burton.
christopher....
--
the younger the child Lynn...@aol.com
the better to eat
the less the years
the better the meat poems for cannibals vol. III
Dorothy J Heydt
LynnJorge <lynn...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Depends on what you're good at. I can read [take] C. S. Friedman's
>writing about clothes for a lot longer than other comparable authors,
>but then just look at what she did [does?] for a living before her
>books took off.
Since I don't know, you have to tell me. Did she design
clothing, maybe? That could be an advantage, or a disadvantage.
Let me give an e.g.
Over on rec.org.sca we recently had a thread that began with
someone complaining that a certain mail-order place claimed to
sell authentic medieval and Renaissance clothing, but in fact
sold fantasy garments that looked like an explosion in a time
machine.
Someone else replied that she had been trained in clothing design;
that authentic medieval and Renaissance clothing consisted of
"butt-ugly rags;" and that what the buyers wanted was not
garments that looked authentic, but garments that looked good.
Leaving aside the fact that modern garments look their best on
people who are skinny as rails and that medieval clothes look
better on the rest of us (and the argument is still going on on
rec.org.sca), consider that somebody with the kind of attitude
expressed above might, if writing fantasy, clothe all her characters
in late-twentieth-century clothing, which would do the fantasy
no good, and whose description would be better left unexpressed.
I'm not talking about Ms. Friedman in particular; I don't
remember any clothing descriptions from the one book of hers I
read.
Lucy Kemnitzer
wrote:
Um, I think John Belushi was cute, specially in his Blues Brothers
suit.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Richard Horton
wrote:
>
>This is something I've noticed in general the past few years. I
>recently read _Shadow of Albion_ by Andre Norton and Mary somebody (my
>apologies to her for forgetting her name).
Rosemary Edghill (aka eluki bes shahar).
I have a sneaky suspicion that eluki wrote, er, let's just say, well
over 50% of the words in that book. But that's OK, she's a good
writer, and so that's a recommendation.
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: richard...@sff.net
Home Page: www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (www.sfsite.com/tangent)
LynnJorge
In article <FEsCH...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com wrote:
I wrote:
>>Depends on what you're good at. I can read [take] C. S. Friedman's
>>writing about clothes for a lot longer than other comparable authors,
>>but then just look at what she did [does?] for a living before her
>>books took off.
>
>Since I don't know, you have to tell me. Did she design
>clothing, maybe? That could be an advantage, or a disadvantage.
She was a costumer for a theatre department.
>Let me give an e.g.
[e.g. snipped]
>I'm not talking about Ms. Friedman in particular; I don't
>remember any clothing descriptions from the one book of hers I
>read.
Which? The ones that come to mind is her Coldfire trilogy. Seems
like you can't introduce a character in that book without introducing
his clothes. But like I said, she did it well, so I didn't mind.
Dorothy J Heydt
William December Starr <wds...@crl.com> wrote:
>In article <FErns...@kithrup.com>,
>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) said:
>
>
>But how can we, or he or she, tell whether it's a "because of" or
>"in spite of" relationship?
It could also be a "has nothing to do with" relationship. But it
doesn't matter. The books are selling.
Dorothy J Heydt
LynnJorge <lynn...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm not talking about Ms. Friedman in particular; I don't
>>remember any clothing descriptions from the one book of hers I
>>read.
>
>Which? The ones that come to mind is her Coldfire trilogy. Seems
>like you can't introduce a character in that book without introducing
>his clothes. But like I said, she did it well, so I didn't mind.
I read the first volume of that one. Disliked it intensely. I
only read it once. I don't remember any costume descriptions,
only the blood, guts, and gore; which is why I disliked it
intensely and read it only once.
(and also because the whole point of the story seemed to be the
environment picking up all the human settlers' bad thoughts and
emotions and solidifying them, none of the good ones. I
understand she retconned this in later volumes. Too late, for me
to want to read 'em.)
Mike Schilling
But a bad day for Belushi would be passed out, lying in a puddle of his
own vomit.
(Nil nisi bonum? Maybe. But when I think of someone with all of his
talent, and success, and opportunities in life not finding a better way
to spend his time than risking death with drugs, it makes me angry.)
Niall McAuley
>For my part, as all here know, I quit reading after Book Two,
>Chapter One.
I don't know how many I've read, which is not a good sign. The last two
were airport purchases: need something thick in English to pass a day
spent in planes and lounges.
It's a shame to waste such a concentrated reading opportunity on reading
Jordan's wallpaper though. Last trip I had _A Deepness in the Sky_
with me, and while _The Neutronium Alchemist_ is several classes below
the Vinge, it was helped by being read straight through.
--
Niall [real address ends in se, not es]
Stefan Raets
Heydt) wrote:
>As for me, I'm an old lady and have discovered that life is too
>short to spend any of it reading what I don't enjoy. (This
>doesn't count stuff waded through in the name of research.)
>Rather than read something new that doesn't suit me, I'll reread
>something old that does.
Amen, amen, amen. As a young man, I have now discovered the same
wisdom. I feel no obligation to finish a book if it isn't gripping
me...
However. After reading 6 volumes of Jordan, and investing a lot of
time in it, I want to know how the story ends, even if the last 2
installments were mediocre at best. I'm not reading 5000 pages
without getting to see this irritating Rand git burn.
Aznyin Stormborn
Level 23 Erudite Wizard in exile.
Current residence: Unrest [Solusek Ro]
Stefan Raets
Raets) wrote:
>Aznyin Stormborn
>Level 23 Erudite Wizard in exile.
>Current residence: Unrest [Solusek Ro]
Argh. I hate it when my newsreader defaults to the wrong sig.
Stefan Raets
**************************************************************
Currently reading: "Adiamante", by L.E.Modesitt Jr.
**************************************************************
Remove the spamblocker for personal replies.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Horton) wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 14:40:52 GMT, bst...@mindspring.com (Bryan Stout)
>wrote:
>
>>This is something I've noticed in general the past few years. I
>>recently read _Shadow of Albion_ by Andre Norton and Mary somebody (my
>>apologies to her for forgetting her name).
>
>Rosemary Edghill (aka eluki bes shahar).
>
>I have a sneaky suspicion that eluki wrote, er, let's just say, well
>over 50% of the words in that book. But that's OK, she's a good
>writer, and so that's a recommendation.
Having actually indirectly discussed this with her, tactfully, I
conclude that "well over 50%" is almost certainly true, but it's still
noticeably under 100%. Ms. Norton was a participant, not a
figurehead.
Brenda
Mike Schilling wrote:
> Lucy Kemnitzer wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 19:05:31 -0400, Brenda <clo...@erols.com>
> > wrote:
> > >OTOH, -no- description is not good either. I had to read a batch of stories last
> > >month in which none of the characters were described at all. I amused myself by
> > >making them all look like John Belushi on a bad day.
> > >
> > >Brenda
> >
> > Um, I think John Belushi was cute, specially in his Blues Brothers
> > suit.
>
> But a bad day for Belushi would be passed out, lying in a puddle of his
> own vomit.
I was thinking of the classic SNL skit when he was impersonating Liz Taylor. A flowing
nightie, and clutching a roast-turkey leg. (Or, for those who must have a more
up-to-date reference, think Fat Bastard in the latest Austin Powers movie.)
Jordan Mendenhall
> In article <7mcur3$3b9$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>,
> Bryan Stout <bst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >Mark Hanson <mpha...@erols.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Plus, the endless, paragraph-long descriptions of the exquisite, lovely, silk
> >>dresses the girls are wearing, is getting REALLY, REALLY old. Mr. Jordan is in
> >>desperate need of an editor.
>
> He's got an editor. I forget her name. She's his wife. But we
> must never lose sight of the fact that he writes like that
> BECAUSE PEOPLE BUY IT. Why should she cut out his fashion-show
> narrative when there are so many people out there willing to pay
> good money for it?
Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden who frequents this group
occasionally.
-JM
Jordan Mendenhall
> In article <FEsCH...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> >>Depends on what you're good at. I can read [take] C. S. Friedman's
> >>writing about clothes for a lot longer than other comparable authors,
> >>but then just look at what she did [does?] for a living before her
> >>books took off.
> >
> >Since I don't know, you have to tell me. Did she design
> >clothing, maybe? That could be an advantage, or a disadvantage.
>
> She was a costumer for a theatre department.
>
> >Let me give an e.g.
>
> [e.g. snipped]
>
> >I'm not talking about Ms. Friedman in particular; I don't
> >remember any clothing descriptions from the one book of hers I
> >read.
>
> Which? The ones that come to mind is her Coldfire trilogy. Seems
> like you can't introduce a character in that book without introducing
> his clothes. But like I said, she did it well, so I didn't mind.
Clothes and their quality are usually, but not always, a reflection of the
person or some aspect of the person's personality. Paragliding poor
passengers pay pennies. Sorry, had to do that.
-JM
David Navarro
>
> In article <378A2FF0...@erols.com>, Brenda wrote:
>
> >Having said that, though, I think that lengthy description of clothing
> >in fiction is about as useful as lengthy description of armaments --
> >only use as necessary.
>
> writing about clothes for a lot longer than other comparable authors,
> but then just look at what she did [does?] for a living before her
> books took off.
>
> passages on just the spices. Weapons, same thing. Though the only
> person who I can bring to mind who I regularly read his weapons
> writings is Burton.
For long and detailed descriptions of clothing, food and weapons, try
Steven Brust...
For the food alone, Brian Jacques, and his _Redwall_ series. Some
impressive feasts there.
Dorothy J Heydt
>who frequents this group
>occasionally.
Patrick is something like Senior Editor at Tor, but the person who
actually goes over the Jordan MSS. with a blue pencil is his
wife, on whose name I am still blanking.
FrankieOx
>Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> good money for it?
>>
>>Actually, I think [Jordan's] editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
>>who frequents this group
>>occasionally.
>
>Patrick is something like Senior Editor at Tor, but the person who
>actually goes over the Jordan MSS. with a blue pencil is his
>wife, on whose name I am still blanking.
Harriet Winslow, IIRC.
James Nicoll
snip
>Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
>who frequents this group occasionally.
^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nnnggg
--
"I don't laugh at you when you're hurt. I laugh at
you when you've been -maimed-."
Jonathan W Hendry
> >>
> >>Actually, I think [Jordan's] editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
> >>who frequents this group
> >>occasionally.
> >
> >actually goes over the Jordan MSS. with a blue pencil is his
> >wife, on whose name I am still blanking.
> Harriet Winslow, IIRC.
Jordan's wife edits his manuscripts?
No wonder they're so long.
Brenda
James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
> Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
> >who frequents this group occasionally.
> ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Nnnggg
>
>
<passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
switch to decaf, eh?
James Nicoll
>
>
>James Nicoll wrote:
>
>> In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
>> Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
>> >who frequents this group occasionally.
>> ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Nnnggg
>>
>
><passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
>switch to decaf, eh?
>
They'd pry my coffee cup out of my cold, dead hand.
FrankieOx
>
>In article <378BB511...@erols.com>, Brenda <clo...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>James Nicoll wrote:
>>
>>> In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
>>> Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> snip
>>>
>>> >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
>>> >who frequents this group occasionally.
>>> ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>> Nnnggg
>>>
>>
>><passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
>>switch to decaf, eh?
>>
> NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!
>
> They'd pry my coffee cup out of my cold, dead hand.
At your current level of excitement, that may well be sooner than later. :)
David Navarro
>
> James Nicoll wrote:
>
> > In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
> > Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > snip
> >
> > >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
> > >who frequents this group occasionally.
> > ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Nnnggg
> >
> >
>
> <passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
> switch to decaf, eh?
Maybe he meant that the guy is prone to posting frenzies in between
long periods of lurking... :)
Dorothy J Heydt
Jonathan W Hendry <jhe...@shrike.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
>Jordan's wife edits his manuscripts?
>
>No wonder they're so long.
No, 'scuse me, you're still missing the point.
The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me
not among, buy them by the cartload that way.
Jordan Mendenhall
> jam...@ece.uwaterloo.ca (James Nicoll) wrote:
> >
> >In article <378BB511...@erols.com>, Brenda <clo...@erols.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>James Nicoll wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
> >>> Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> snip
> >>>
> >>> >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
> >>> >who frequents this group occasionally.
> >>> ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>>
> >>> Nnnggg
> >>>
> >>
> >><passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
> >>switch to decaf, eh?
> >>
> > NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!
> >
> > They'd pry my coffee cup out of my cold, dead hand.
>
> At your current level of excitement, that may well be sooner than later. :)
Ok, so what did I do?
-J "Naivety is a good description of me" M
Richard Horton
Watt-Evans) wrote:
>Having actually indirectly discussed this with her, tactfully, I
>conclude that "well over 50%" is almost certainly true, but it's still
>noticeably under 100%. Ms. Norton was a participant, not a
>figurehead.
Obviously I had my cynicism meter set way too high. I did always
assume that Ms. Norton had at the very least an editor's role, and
plenty of approval/disapproval rights, as well as suggestion rights.
I really like eluki's Regencies, and this books and its putative
sequels look like the closest she'll get to Regencies for a while, so
I do plan to read them.
Paul Andinach
> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me not
> among, buy them by the cartload that way.
You can't justify that. It may well be that they'd buy them by the
cartload if they were short, and nobody's ever tried the experiment.
Paul
--
The sixth Sikh sheik's sixth sheep's sick.
James Nicoll
Paul Andinach <pand...@mermaid.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me not
>> among, buy them by the cartload that way.
>
>You can't justify that. It may well be that they'd buy them by the
>cartload if they were short, and nobody's ever tried the experiment.
>
There's short fantasy novels out there. I hear good things about
Turner's books and Wrede's are well done. Which sell better?
Mind you, Turner's being mishandled imo by Del Rey.
James Nicoll
Sion Arrowsmith
James Nicoll <jam...@ece.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> There's short fantasy novels out there. I hear good things about
>Turner's books and Wrede's are well done. Which sell better?
In this country, the thick ones. Trivially, because the thin ones
don't get published, unless they're juveniles.
--
\S -- si...@chiark.greenend.org.uk -- http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/
___ | "Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other"
\X/ | -- Arthur C. Clarke
| If music be the food of love, bring me a doggie bag.
Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes
Stefan Raets <sra...@prodigy.NOSPAM.net> spake:
>However. After reading 6 volumes of Jordan, and investing a lot of
>time in it, I want to know how the story ends, even if the last 2
>installments were mediocre at best. I'm not reading 5000 pages
>without getting to see this irritating Rand git burn.
He won't, you know (not unless you burn the books yourself like I
did). My prediction (from reading the first two only) is that Rand will
break the cycle of the WoT and he'll live happily ever after in a menage
a vingt with his chicks, and Jordan will mock you for believing it.
Then Rand will find out he's immortal, and travel through space and time
screwing his mother, cloning himself as daughters, and, er, um. Sorry.
That's too far for even Jordan.
-- <a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
Paul Clarke
<dna...@anim.dreamworks.com> wrote:
>LynnJorge wrote:
>>
>>
>> I can think of authors who write about food and I can read long
>> passages on just the spices. Weapons, same thing. Though the only
>> person who I can bring to mind who I regularly read his weapons
>> writings is Burton.
>
>For long and detailed descriptions of clothing, food and weapons, try
>Steven Brust...
For clothes and weapons, there's Laurell Hamilton. Anita Blake can't
see someone without describing what they're wearing in detail, with
particular attention to colours.
Andrew Plotkin
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me not
>> among, buy them by the cartload that way.
>
> You can't justify that. It may well be that they'd buy them by the
> cartload if they were short, and nobody's ever tried the experiment.
Perhaps Jordan *can* justify it; there must be fan-mail.
And the rasf-jordan newsgroup, although someone else will have to comment
on whether the clothing prose is highly regarded there.
Maybe William Goldman should write _Wheel of Time: the Good Parts
Edition_. :-)
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
Lisa A Leutheuser
Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>FrankieOx wrote:
>
>> jam...@ece.uwaterloo.ca (James Nicoll) wrote:
>> >
>> >In article <378BB511...@erols.com>, Brenda <clo...@erols.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>James Nicoll wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In article <378B71CB...@earthlink.net>,
>> >>> Jordan Mendenhall <jor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> snip
>> >>>
>> >>> >Actually, I think his editor is Mr. Patrick Nielson Hayden
>> >>> >who frequents this group occasionally.
>> >>> ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >>>
>> >>> Nnnggg
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >><passes cool washcloth to lay on forehead> Maybe it's time to
>> >>switch to decaf, eh?
>> >>
>> > NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!
>> >
>> > They'd pry my coffee cup out of my cold, dead hand.
>>
>> At your current level of excitement, that may well be sooner than later. :)
>
>Ok, so what did I do?
"Frequents occasionally" is an oxymoron.
You've been picked on for your grammar. Mr. Nicoll should know
better, though. "Nnnggg" lacks proper subject-verb agreement. :-)
Lisa Leutheuser
eal (at) umich.edu
http://www.umich.edu/~eal
Aaron Bergman
>Paul Andinach <pand...@mermaid.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>>> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me not
>>> among, buy them by the cartload that way.
>>
>> You can't justify that. It may well be that they'd buy them by the
>> cartload if they were short, and nobody's ever tried the experiment.
>
>Perhaps Jordan *can* justify it; there must be fan-mail.
>
>And the rasf-jordan newsgroup, although someone else will have to comment
>on whether the clothing prose is highly regarded there.
Someone did? Whatever....
I don't think anyone complains much about the length. What people
complain about (and this is by no means universal, but it does
apply to me) is the fact that the past 2-3 books have been fairly
voluminous and consisted of a lot of moving people around without
many "significant" events.
Aaron
--
Aaron Bergman
<http://www.princeton.edu/~abergman/>
Aaron Bergman
>In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.990714...@mermaid.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>,
>Paul Andinach <pand...@mermaid.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
>>On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>>> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me not
>>> among, buy them by the cartload that way.
>>
>>You can't justify that. It may well be that they'd buy them by the
>>cartload if they were short, and nobody's ever tried the experiment.
>
>Turner's books and Wrede's are well done. Which sell better?
Maybe they just don't have as wide an appeal.
On the other hand, I'll admit that, when I'm looking for some
trash reading, I'll pick a longer book over a shorter one for the
simple justification that if I'm going to spend 7 bucks on a
book that will, in all probability be mediocre to good, I want more
than an hour's entertainment out of it.
Jonathan W Hendry
> In article <378b...@news.depaul.edu>,
> Jonathan W Hendry <jhe...@shrike.depaul.edu> wrote:
> >
> >Jordan's wife edits his manuscripts?
> >
> >No wonder they're so long.
> No, 'scuse me, you're still missing the point.
> The books are long because the many Jordan fans, whom count me
> not among, buy them by the cartload that way.
You could fit more in the cart if they were smaller. ;)