Miles, Mystery & Mayhem is an omnibus reprint
Lois McMaster Bujold
It occurs to me that I'd better mention, since Amazon.com and B&N.com
are shipping, that the December release _Miles, Mystery & Mayhem_ is an
omnibus *reprint* of some of my earlier titles, in this case, _Cetaganda_,
_Ethan of Athos_, and the novella "Labyrinth", plus a new short essay. (And
some rather fine cover art.) Very nice hardcover edition and all, if you
want to own the compendium, or haven't read the stories or all the stories
yet, but this is NOT the *new* Miles book. Sorting out this fact should not
be a problem for people looking at the physical book in stores -- it is
reiterated in the usual publisher's note on the inner flap of the dust
jacket -- but I don't want to have to field complaints from on-line shoppers
who thought it was something else.
The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
May 2002.
Ta, Lois.
GuardedResponse
...safekeeping, in case you lose yours. I would do it for free.
Regrds, GR
"Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net...
> Hi Folks --
Liz Barr
> May 2002.
You mean I have to WAIT? Oh well ... it'll be out in time for my birthday.
Liz
Michael Schilling
news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net...
> May 2002.
The same month as Episode 2: Send in the Clones. Decisions, decisions...
:-)
Robert Sneddon
Bujold <lmbu...@qwest.net> writes
>Hi Folks --
[Clip]
>
> The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
>May 2002.
>
> Ta, Lois.
A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website. There's quite a
gap between the end of _ACC_ and the beginning of _DI_. We don't see
MilesWed, but we do see the results of said Union on the way back from
the Cabbage Patch on Beta Colony.
Of course, the really lucky stiffs (like Yr Hmbl Crrspdt) heard Lois
read chunks from the first *three* chapters at MilPhil. Hehehehe...
--
Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
Taki Kogoma
<mschi...@earthlink.net>, to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
What's the problem?
Obviously, you read the book while you're waiting in line for the
movie.
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk | "I'll get a life when someone
(Known to some as Taki Kogoma) | demonstrates that it would be
quirk @ swcp.com | superior to what I have now."
Veteran of the '91 sf-lovers re-org. | -- Gym Quirk
Ide Cyan
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:08:44 GMT, did "Michael Schilling"
> <mschi...@earthlink.net>, to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
> >"Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> >news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net...
> >> The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
> >> May 2002.
> >
> >The same month as Episode 2: Send in the Clones. Decisions, decisions...
> >:-)
>
> What's the problem?
>
> Obviously, you read the book while you're waiting in line for the
> movie.
That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
reading the book.
--
"I knew a girl at school called Pandora.
Never got to see her box, though."
- Spike, Notting Hill.
Kerry J. Renaissance-McAdams
Hmm.... Hopefully the baby and I will have settled down sufficiently
by then so that I can snag time to read it myself and/or read it to
the baby. (Who is due in mid-to-late March. And if the ultrasound
tech is correct and it _is_ a boy, we're calling him Miles.).
-- Kerry J. Renaissance-McAdams
Master Fireweaver
http://www.circle-of-fireweavers.org: The Fireweaver Main Site
http://www.thephoenix-web.net: Phoenix Rising Site
http://www.kerry-renaissance.net: My Home Site
Robert A. Woodward
Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Actually, those are merely lucky stiffs.
The really lucky stiffs got a printout of the entire book as a wedding
present.
--
robe...@drizzle.com http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw/
rawoo...@aol.com
Jo Walton
no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" writes:
> In article <3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net>, Lois McMaster
> Bujold <lmbu...@qwest.net> writes
> >Hi Folks --
> [Clip]
> >
> > The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
> >May 2002.
> >
> > Ta, Lois.
>
> A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website.
<snip details of the first chapter>
Will you PLEASE use spoiler warnings for people who don't want to read
the first chapter or know events from it out of context.
Sheesh!
I want to read the whole book, the whole story, with the pacing of the
whole story as it falls, I don't want to know anything whatsoever about
it before I get all of it.
I'm just as impatient to read it as anyone else (if not more so, because
I've just re-read the entire series and Sasha is reading them -- he's up
to _Cetaganda_ -- and keeps talking about them all the time) but I don't
want shreds of it dragged across the newsgroup with no warning.
They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for people.
--
Jo J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk
I kissed a kif at Kefk
*THE KING'S PEACE* out now *THE KING'S NAME* out imminently from Tor.
Sample Chapters, Map, Poems, & stuff at http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk
Htn963
rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
people would pay to read her shopping lists.
BTW, as someone who has read all the Vorkosigan books, might I inquire
why "Labyrinth" is being recompiled in this omnibus? It already appeared
in a previous Bujold collection, _Borders of Infinity_.
--
Ht
|Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore
never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
--John Donne, "Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions"|
David Johnston
>
> Taki Kogoma wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:08:44 GMT, did "Michael Schilling"
> > <mschi...@earthlink.net>, to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
> > >"Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> > >news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net..
> > >> May 2002.
> > >
> > >The same month as Episode 2: Send in the Clones. Decisions, decisions...
> > >:-)
> >
> > What's the problem?
> >
> > Obviously, you read the book while you're waiting in line for the
> > movie.
>
> That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
> for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
> reading the book.
I don't read that slowly.
David Johnston
>
> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
> rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
> anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling.
Wouldn't it be a bit premature to have a real critical discussion of a book nobody
has yet read?
Ide Cyan
> Ide Cyan wrote:
> > That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
> > for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
> > reading the book.
>
> I don't read that slowly.
Depends on how long the lines are, I guess.
Jerry Brown
> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>people would pay to read her shopping lists.
Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
> BTW, as someone who has read all the Vorkosigan books, might I inquire
>why "Labyrinth" is being recompiled in this omnibus? It already appeared
>in a previous Bujold collection, _Borders of Infinity_.
Probably a marketing decision by Baen, and out of Bujold's hands. Kind
of her to warn us though.
Jerry Brown
--
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Lois McMaster Bujold
"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
news:k7ifvt4nt8g1jmrn0...@4ax.com......
> > BTW, as someone who has read all the Vorkosigan books, might I
inquire
> >why "Labyrinth" is being recompiled in this omnibus? It already
appeared
> >in a previous Bujold collection, _Borders of Infinity_.
>
> Probably a marketing decision by Baen, and out of Bujold's hands. Kind
> of her to warn us though.
> Jerry Brown
All the omnibus volumes have been/are being assembled in series-internal
chronological order. The novellas fall variously amongst the novels.
_Young Miles_ consisted of _The Warrior's Apprentice_, the novella "The
Mountains of Mourning", and _The Vor Game_. Sometime late next year Baen
plans another one, to be titled _Miles Errant_ and comprised of the novella
"The Borders of Infinity", _Brothers in Arms_, and _Mirror Dance_.
Ta, Lois.
Scott Beeler
> BTW, as someone who has read all the Vorkosigan books, might I inquire
> why "Labyrinth" is being recompiled in this omnibus? It already appeared
> in a previous Bujold collection, _Borders of Infinity_.
They also put one of the other stories ("The Mountains of Mourning"?)
in the previous omnibus (_Young Miles_), right? So it would seem that
if they then put the third story from BoI into a third Miles Omnibus,
then future readers wouldn't have to pick up the collection, just the
omnibuses. And they would fit better timeline-wise that way too,
IIRC.
--
Scott C. Beeler scott...@home.com
Taki Kogoma
to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
> BTW, as someone who has read all the Vorkosigan books, might I inquire
>why "Labyrinth" is being recompiled in this omnibus? It already appeared
>in a previous Bujold collection, _Borders of Infinity_.
Presumably for the same reason why "The Mountains of Mourning" was
reprinted in the _Young Miles_ omnibus: Some vague notion of thematic
unity or whathaveyou.
Taki Kogoma
to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
>Taki Kogoma wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:08:44 GMT, did "Michael Schilling"
>> <mschi...@earthlink.net>, to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
>> >"Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote in message
>> >news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net...
>> >> The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
>> >> May 2002.
>> >
>> >The same month as Episode 2: Send in the Clones. Decisions, decisions...
>> >:-)
>>
>> What's the problem?
>>
>> Obviously, you read the book while you're waiting in line for the
>> movie.
>
>That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
>for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
>reading the book.
You mean you're not going be camping out for the week before opening
waiting for tickets?
Christopher Kane
Though, people who only buy the omnibuses would miss out on the
framing device used in _Borders of Inifinity_, which I rather enjoyed,
and which is referred to in the later books.
Chris
--
Christopher Kane
Christoph...@brown.edu
Jerry Brown
What will happen to the linking material that brackets each of the
stories in the original version of the 'Borders of Infinity' fix-up
book? It can't really stand alone as each chapter ends with a lead in
to one of the novellas, and it would be a shame to lose it completely.
Terry Austin
>On 18 Nov 2001 09:29:49 GMT, htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>
>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>>anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>>people would pay to read her shopping lists.
>
>Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
Er, you haven't read _Barrayar_?
--
Terry Austin <tau...@hyperbooks.com>
http://www.hyperbooks.com/
Metacreator character software now available
Terry Austin
>David Johnston wrote:
>> Ide Cyan wrote:
>> > That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
>> > for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
>> > reading the book.
>>
>> I don't read that slowly.
>
>Depends on how long the lines are, I guess.
I have a roommate that reads that fast. I've seen him read a full length
novel in less than 2 hours.
Lois McMaster Bujold
"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
> > All the omnibus volumes have been/are being assembled in
series-internal
> >chronological order. The novellas fall variously amongst the novels.
> >_Young Miles_ consisted of _The Warrior's Apprentice_, the novella "The
> >Mountains of Mourning", and _The Vor Game_. Sometime late next year Baen
> >plans another one, to be titled _Miles Errant_ and comprised of the
novella
> >"The Borders of Infinity", _Brothers in Arms_, and _Mirror Dance_.
>
> What will happen to the linking material that brackets each of the
> stories in the original version of the 'Borders of Infinity' fix-up
> book? It can't really stand alone as each chapter ends with a lead in
> to one of the novellas, and it would be a shame to lose it completely.
>
It goes away, I'm afraid. At least for the purposes of the omnibuses.
It may come back on the tide in future single-volume re-prints, someday.
_Borders_ is one of the better series-starter books, after all.
Ta, Lois.
J.B. Moreno
> In article <koD9gvA4...@nojay.fsnet.co.uk>
> no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" writes:
>
> > In article <3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net>, Lois McMaster
> > Bujold <lmbu...@qwest.net> writes
> > >Hi Folks --
> > [Clip]
> > >
> > > The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
> > >May 2002.
> > >
> > > Ta, Lois.
> >
> > A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website.
>
> <snip details of the first chapter>
>
> Will you PLEASE use spoiler warnings for people who don't want to read
> the first chapter or know events from it out of context.
>
> Sheesh!
>
> I want to read the whole book, the whole story, with the pacing of the
> whole story as it falls, I don't want to know anything whatsoever about
> it before I get all of it.
>
> I'm just as impatient to read it as anyone else (if not more so, because
> I've just re-read the entire series and Sasha is reading them -- he's up
> to _Cetaganda_ -- and keeps talking about them all the time) but I don't
> want shreds of it dragged across the newsgroup with no warning.
>
> They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for people.
--
JBM
"Your depression will be added to my own" -- Marvin of Borg
J.B. Moreno
> no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" writes:
>
> > Lois McMaster Bujold <lmbu...@qwest.net> writes
> > >The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
> > >May 2002.
> >
> > A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website.
>
> <snip details of the first chapter>
>
> Will you PLEASE use spoiler warnings for people who don't want to read
> the first chapter or know events from it out of context.
-snip-
> They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for people.
Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
sentence).
Ian Galbraith
: Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
:rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
:anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
:people would pay to read her shopping lists.
I seem to remember a fair bit of criticism of ACC over the romance
elements.
[snip]
--
Ian Galbraith
Email: igalb...@ozonline.com.au ICQ#: 7849631
"Being cool requires no work. Mostly it requires detachment.
You can be cool and not care about being cool. Being hip
requires both style and effort. You can't be hip without
working at it." - The A.I. War by Daniel Keys Moran
Michael Schilling
news:3BF773...@telusplanet.net...
Not in a science fiction newsgroup :-)
Michael Schilling
news:3BF72355...@yahoo.com...
> Taki Kogoma wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:08:44 GMT, did "Michael Schilling"
> > <mschi...@earthlink.net>, to rec.arts.sf.written decree...
> > >"Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> > >news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net...
> > >> The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be
out in
> > >> May 2002.
> > >
> > >The same month as Episode 2: Send in the Clones. Decisions,
decisions...
> > >:-)
> >
> > What's the problem?
> >
> > Obviously, you read the book while you're waiting in line for the
> > movie.
>
> That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
> for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
> reading the book.
AFAICT, that makes it a good plan.
Thomas Yan
htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
> rec.arts.sf.written.
Well, I'm a fan, so perhaps that warps my view, but I really don't
think there is all that much Bujold content on this group. Indeed, if
there was lots of new analyses, I suspect I would be rather happier.
> I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works anymore,
> just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
> people would pay to read her shopping lists.
That doesn't quite match my perception of this newsgroup. To my eyes,
rasfw lacks much of the vitality that I loved a few years ago, where
there was much more critical discussion in general of all books and
authors. These days, many of my favorite posters from that time are
largely silent or in fact absent (not even lurking).
--
Thomas Yan (ty...@twcny.rr.com) Note: I don't check e-mail often.
Be pro-active. Fight sucky software and learned helplessness.
Apologies for any lack of capitalization; typing hurts my hands.
Progress on next DbS installment: pp1-38 of pp1-181 of _Taltos_
John Andrew Fairhurst
robe...@drizzle.com says...
> The really lucky stiffs got a printout of the entire book as a wedding
> present.
>
You know, Dante should have thought up a few more circles of Hell...
:-)
--
John Fairhurst
In Association with Amazon worldwide:
http://www.johnsbooks.co.uk/Books/Gollancz
More Classic SF
Julie Pascal
Yes, it would.
As for being "critical"... well, if I got to be one of her beta readers
I'd probably be able to point out a minor point or two that might
be "fixed" but what would be the point of doing it here?
--Julie
Robert Sneddon
<pl...@newsreaders.com> writes
>Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for people.
>
>Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
>newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
>deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
>sentence).
Nah. I scwewed up, Doc. Jo won't even read the Baen excerpts; many
people prefer to get their first Lois-blast when they open the cover of
the real honest-to-goodness paper book, rather than suffering Baen's
Death-of-a-thousand-excerpts drip-drip torture.
Sorree. I am usually careful about stuff like this. Sorree.
(I thought Jo was in the audience at MilPhil when Lois was giving her
reading...)
--
Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
kesi...@math.ttu.edu
: David Johnston wrote:
:> Ide Cyan wrote:
:> > That's a bad plan. If you start reading the book while you're in line
:> > for the movie, you can forget about seeing the movie until you're done
:> > reading the book.
:> I don't read that slowly.
: Depends on how long the lines are, I guess.
Usually about four inches or so, yes? I fail to see what that has to
do with reading speed, though.
==Jake
J.B. Moreno
> J.B. Moreno <pl...@newsreaders.com> writes
> >Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for
> >>people.
> >
> >Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
> >newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
> >deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
> >sentence).
>
> Nah. I scwewed up, Doc.
I know, but in *this* particular instance it wasn't a /major/ screwup.
I'd hate to do it (who'd want to stop reading after just the first
sentence), but I really do believe that everything you said could be
deduced from the first sentence (making a few basic assumptions based
upon it being a Miles book and the last Miles book being ACC).
> Jo won't even read the Baen excerpts; many people prefer to get their
> first Lois-blast when they open the cover of the real honest-to-goodness
> paper book, rather than suffering Baen's Death-of-a-thousand-excerpts
> drip-drip torture.
Yeah, I know -- she's weird that way (or she's got iron self-control
one, not sure which).
> Sorree. I am usually careful about stuff like this. Sorree.
>
> (I thought Jo was in the audience at MilPhil when Lois was giving her
> reading...)
Maybe she was able to walk away?
Andrea Leistra
Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>In article <20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com>,
> htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>
>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>> rec.arts.sf.written.
>
>Well, I'm a fan, so perhaps that warps my view, but I really don't
>think there is all that much Bujold content on this group. Indeed, if
>there was lots of new analyses, I suspect I would be rather happier.
Not so much now.
After the release of the last book, Bujold threads probably made
up roughly half the traffic here; I suspect it was a larger fraction
than the Jordan threads made up when everyone was screaming about
that years ago, but as I wasn't here then I don't know for certain.
The key difference is probably that the inundation of Bujold threads
did go away after a few months.
>These days, many of my favorite posters from that time are
>largely silent or in fact absent (not even lurking).
How do you know they aren't lurking?
--
Andrea Leistra
Mary K. Kuhner
>: Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>:rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>:anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>:people would pay to read her shopping lists.
>I seem to remember a fair bit of criticism of ACC over the romance
>elements.
It's also worth noting that when an author has written that many
books, people who don't like her work (like me) have long ago
stopped reading it, and so don't have much to say about the new
one.
We did have an interesting, if rather hot, discussion of why people
who don't like Bujold's work don't like it. The usual assumption
among people who do (romance and soft-SF elements) doesn't hold for
me at all; it's purely an unfortunate reaction to her writing
voice. (For some reason it makes me feel as though I'm sliding
off a transparent veneer of plexiglass rather than touching the
actual characters and situations.)
This is not to say they're bad books; tastes just vary.
You could try Google for that discussion, but it was quite a while
ago.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
Jo Walton
pl...@newsreaders.com "J.B. Moreno" writes:
> Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
> newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
> deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
> sentence).
I don't even want the first sentence, thank you, until I can have all the
other sentences that follow on after it.
The reason for this is that if I have the first sentence or any knowledge
at all, I start writing the book in my head, and then I have to get that
out of my head before I can enjoy the actual book that's in front of me.
--
Jo J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk
I kissed a kif at Kefk
*THE KING'S PEACE* out now *THE KING'S NAME* out imminently from Tor.
Sample Chapters, Map, Poems, & stuff at http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk
Jerry Brown
<tau...@hyperbooks.com> wrote:
>Jerry Brown <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
>
>>On 18 Nov 2001 09:29:49 GMT, htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>>
>>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>>rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>>>anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>>>people would pay to read her shopping lists.
>>
>>Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
>
>Er, you haven't read _Barrayar_?
Yes, the reference was intended.
Nancy Lebovitz
J.B. Moreno <pl...@newsreaders.com> wrote:
>Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> J.B. Moreno <pl...@newsreaders.com> writes
>> >Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >> They're called "spoilers" for a reason, they can spoil the book for
>> >>people.
>> >
>> >Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
>> >newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
>> >deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
>> >sentence).
>>
>> Nah. I scwewed up, Doc.
>
>I know, but in *this* particular instance it wasn't a /major/ screwup.
>I'd hate to do it (who'd want to stop reading after just the first
>sentence), but I really do believe that everything you said could be
>deduced from the first sentence (making a few basic assumptions based
>upon it being a Miles book and the last Miles book being ACC).
>
>> Jo won't even read the Baen excerpts; many people prefer to get their
>> first Lois-blast when they open the cover of the real honest-to-goodness
>> paper book, rather than suffering Baen's Death-of-a-thousand-excerpts
>> drip-drip torture.
>
>Yeah, I know -- she's weird that way (or she's got iron self-control
>one, not sure which).
>
didn't make my life better, and I've got so much to read that I tend
not to be that desperate for any particular novel. It doesn't take
any self-control for me to not read the excerpts.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Richard Harter
(Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>In article <3bfd3e59...@news.latrobe.edu.au>,
>Ian Galbraith <igalb...@ozonline.com.au> wrote:
>>On 18 Nov 2001 09:29:49 GMT, Htn963 wrote:
>
>>: Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>:rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>>:anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>>:people would pay to read her shopping lists.
>
>>I seem to remember a fair bit of criticism of ACC over the romance
>>elements.
>
>It's also worth noting that when an author has written that many
>books, people who don't like her work (like me) have long ago
>stopped reading it, and so don't have much to say about the new
>one.
>
>We did have an interesting, if rather hot, discussion of why people
>who don't like Bujold's work don't like it. The usual assumption
>among people who do (romance and soft-SF elements) doesn't hold for
>me at all; it's purely an unfortunate reaction to her writing
>voice. (For some reason it makes me feel as though I'm sliding
>off a transparent veneer of plexiglass rather than touching the
>actual characters and situations.)
Now that is a very interesting observation and a striking image.
Could I possibly prevail upon you to expand upon that thought. The
reaction "for some reason it makes me feel ..." is the sort of thing
that someone who is interesting in writing (as distinct, say, from
fanboys defending their favorite icon) is particularly intriguing.
I suppose that there must be some work that crystalized this reaction
for you when you read it. You wouldn't happen to recall any specifics
would you, e.g., a particular story or scene where this sense is
particularly strong, or is it more a case of a Holmesian dog that
signifies by not barking.
Richard Harter, c...@tiac.net,
http://www.tiac.net/users/cri, http://www.varinoma.com
I have a rock garden. Last week three of them died.
- Richard Diran
Mark Reichert
news:20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com...
> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
> rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her
works
> anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling.
Perhaps because some of us have nothing critical to say? Besides, this is
rec.arts.sf.written, not rec.arts.sf.critiques. We don't have to be
critical.
Thomas Yan
alei...@ptah.u.arizona.edu (Andrea Leistra) wrote:
> In article <tyan-A88BD3.2...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
> >In article <20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com>,
> > htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
> >
> >> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
> >> rec.arts.sf.written.
> >
> >Well, I'm a fan, so perhaps that warps my view, but I really don't
> >think there is all that much Bujold content on this group. Indeed, if
> >there was lots of new analyses, I suspect I would be rather happier.
>
> Not so much now.
I got the impression Htn used "sometimes" to mean "very often", not
just after a new book.
> After the release of the last book, Bujold threads probably made
> up roughly half the traffic here; I suspect it was a larger fraction
> than the Jordan threads made up when everyone was screaming about
> that years ago, but as I wasn't here then I don't know for certain.
> The key difference is probably that the inundation of Bujold threads
> did go away after a few months.
One relatively new factor is the periodic release of sample chapters.
Each new chapter that goes up often spawns a fresh round of discussion.
I think something similar used to happen with Weber's Honor Harrington
books.
> >These days, many of my favorite posters from that time are
> >largely silent or in fact absent (not even lurking).
>
> How do you know they aren't lurking?
They've said so elsewhere, sometimes in response to a lament of mine.
Jo Walton
no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" writes:
> (I thought Jo was in the audience at MilPhil when Lois was giving her
> reading...)
Emmet was, I wasn't. I only go to readings of things I've already read,
or short stories.
David T. Bilek
Leistra) wrote:
>In article <tyan-A88BD3.2...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>>In article <20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com>,
>> htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>>
>>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>> rec.arts.sf.written.
>>
>>Well, I'm a fan, so perhaps that warps my view, but I really don't
>>think there is all that much Bujold content on this group. Indeed, if
>>there was lots of new analyses, I suspect I would be rather happier.
>
>Not so much now.
>
>After the release of the last book, Bujold threads probably made
>up roughly half the traffic here; I suspect it was a larger fraction
>than the Jordan threads made up when everyone was screaming about
>that years ago, but as I wasn't here then I don't know for certain.
Er, no.
The Jordan threads almost drowned out the rest of the group.
-David
Mary K. Kuhner
Richard Harter <c...@tiac.net> wrote:
>On 19 Nov 2001 17:40:17 GMT, mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu
>(Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>> (For some reason [Bujold's writing] makes me feel as though I'm sliding
>>off a transparent veneer of plexiglass rather than touching the
>>actual characters and situations.)
>Now that is a very interesting observation and a striking image.
>Could I possibly prevail upon you to expand upon that thought. The
>reaction "for some reason it makes me feel ..." is the sort of thing
>that someone who is interesting in writing (as distinct, say, from
>fanboys defending their favorite icon) is particularly intriguing.
>I suppose that there must be some work that crystalized this reaction
>for you when you read it. You wouldn't happen to recall any specifics
>would you, e.g., a particular story or scene where this sense is
>particularly strong, or is it more a case of a Holmesian dog that
>signifies by not barking.
I certainly know which book it was; it was _The Spirit Ring_. I realized
that while I can tolerate a little plexiglass in SF, I really can't in
fantasy. I found _Spirit Ring_ so annoying that I either put it down
unfinished, or wished I had.
The one I read before that was _Barrayar_. I was very amused by
the "Cordelia goes shopping" thing, but when I thought back over
the book I realized that amusement over that one scene was my
*only* strong or memorable reaction to it--the rest just slid by.
In retrospect this made me feel that the book couldn't have been
all that good, though I enjoyed it while I was reading it.
The best guess I can make about the problem is by referring to the
scene in one of the short stories where Miles tries to jump a hurdle
and breaks both his legs. The writer's "camera" pulls back at that
point--we don't hear how it felt physically, and we don't hear how
Miles felt about it. The situation as set up is exquisitely painful,
but it is treated in a mode more normally used for comedy--with
enough distance to be funny. _The Spirit Ring_ is not anything
resembling funny--I don't recall laughing at it at all--but it still
does this pulling-back thing.
I am not saying this is a bad style--it clearly works really well for
a lot of people. I'm just personally put off by it. Cherryh doing the
same sort of scene would have me in the head and body of the
character in pain--and sometimes she overdoes this (the blizzard
in _Cloud's Rider_) but on balance I like the effect better.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
J.B. Moreno
> pl...@newsreaders.com "J.B. Moreno" writes:
>
> > Not to defend the lack of spoilers when talking about unreleased or
> > newly released books, but I believe that everything he said could be
> > deduced from the first sentence of _DI_ (certainly by the fourth
> > sentence).
>
> I don't even want the first sentence, thank you, until I can have all the
> other sentences that follow on after it.
Understood, and as I said I'm not defending the lack of spoilers, just
explaining that it wasn't a very big one in the scheme of things.
> The reason for this is that if I have the first sentence or any knowledge
> at all, I start writing the book in my head, and then I have to get that
> out of my head before I can enjoy the actual book that's in front of me.
Hmn, I've had problems like that on rereads -- never from just advance
knowledge of what's going on for a book I haven't read, but for
something I've read and enjoyed I sometimes think characters should have
acted /slightly/ different than they did....
...and then there's books like Turtledove's Gerin Fox series where I
want to slip them a bit of advanced knowledge (greenhouse, greenhouse,
greenhouse, printing press, printing press, printing press).
Terry Austin
>On Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:43:31 -0800, Terry Austin
><tau...@hyperbooks.com> wrote:
>
>>Jerry Brown <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
>>
>>>On 18 Nov 2001 09:29:49 GMT, htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>>>rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her works
>>>>anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling. I wouldn't be surprised if you
>>>>people would pay to read her shopping lists.
>>>
>>>Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
>>
>>Er, you haven't read _Barrayar_?
>
>Yes, the reference was intended.
>
Well, then. Carry on.
Erol K. Bayburt
> The best guess I can make about the problem is by referring to the
> scene in one of the short stories where Miles tries to jump a hurdle
> and breaks both his legs. The writer's "camera" pulls back at that
> point--we don't hear how it felt physically, and we don't hear how
> Miles felt about it. The situation as set up is exquisitely painful,
> but it is treated in a mode more normally used for comedy--with
> enough distance to be funny. _The Spirit Ring_ is not anything
> resembling funny--I don't recall laughing at it at all--but it still
> does this pulling-back thing.
>
> I am not saying this is a bad style--it clearly works really well for
> a lot of people. I'm just personally put off by it. Cherryh doing the
> same sort of scene would have me in the head and body of the
> character in pain--and sometimes she overdoes this (the blizzard
> in _Cloud's Rider_) but on balance I like the effect better.
This really is a milage-varies thing, and you just made me realize
one reason why I can't stand Cherryh: When reading about characters in
pain, I *need* this distance, this pulling-back, in order to make the
pain tolerable to read about. (This may be why I have problems with
Bujold's _Mirror Dance_ - there, she doesn't pull back, or doesn't pull
back as much.)
When Bujold does get into the head of a character in pain, the character
will often distance *himself* from the pain, will have a sort of mordant
black humor about it. I find this sort of pain to at least be interesting
to read about. When the character just suffers, as in much of Cherryh,
or Mark's torment in _Mirror Dance_, my reaction is that I just want it
to stop. Let the character die, or recover, or anything. I don't care
how the pain stops just as long as it does. And from there it's just a
short step to not caring how the *story* turns out, just as long as it
stops. The quickest way to do that, of course, is to not finish the
book - or better, to not start it in the first place.
Erol K. Bayburt
Ero...@aol.com (mail drop)
Er...@ix.netcom.com (surfboard)
Robert Sneddon
<mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu> writes
>
>The best guess I can make about the problem is by referring to the
>scene in one of the short stories where Miles tries to jump a hurdle
>and breaks both his legs. The writer's "camera" pulls back at that
>point--we don't hear how it felt physically, and we don't hear how
>Miles felt about it.
Miles breaks limbs regularly at this point in his life. He's still
growing, so they haven't replaced the long bones with the plastic
replacements yet. Observe Bothari's reaction to Miles' accident. He's
used to pain, bucket-loads of it. He's developed coping methods. He
copes.
> The situation as set up is exquisitely painful,
>but it is treated in a mode more normally used for comedy--with
>enough distance to be funny.
It is almost funny. Miles is about to achieve his life's ambition,
after getting all sorts of rules bent to even allow him to compete --
and his stupid pride knocks him out of the running at the first hurdle
(so to speak). After that, he's got to face all the people he was hoping
to impress, knowing that they know he screwed up.
[Spoiler for _Memory_ coming up]
Lois does it again when Miles loses his commission -- his seizure chops
a fellow officer's legs off. The medics can reattach them, but he ends
up several centimetres shorter. Miles is mortified when he meets the
officer later, but because of Security considerations he can't even
apologise to the man. Miles' embarrassment is funny, even though you
feel a great sympathy for the injured officer.
Richard Harter
(Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>In article <3bf94c4b...@news.SullyButtes.net>,
>Richard Harter <c...@tiac.net> wrote:
>>On 19 Nov 2001 17:40:17 GMT, mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu
>>(Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
>
>>> (For some reason [Bujold's writing] makes me feel as though I'm sliding
>>>off a transparent veneer of plexiglass rather than touching the
>>>actual characters and situations.)
>
>>Now that is a very interesting observation and a striking image.
>>Could I possibly prevail upon you to expand upon that thought. The
>>reaction "for some reason it makes me feel ..." is the sort of thing
>>that someone who is interesting in writing (as distinct, say, from
>>fanboys defending their favorite icon) is particularly intriguing.
>
>>I suppose that there must be some work that crystalized this reaction
>>for you when you read it. You wouldn't happen to recall any specifics
>>would you, e.g., a particular story or scene where this sense is
>>particularly strong, or is it more a case of a Holmesian dog that
>>signifies by not barking.
>
>I certainly know which book it was; it was _The Spirit Ring_. I realized
>that while I can tolerate a little plexiglass in SF, I really can't in
>fantasy. I found _Spirit Ring_ so annoying that I either put it down
>unfinished, or wished I had.
It is an odd thing but I can't recall anything about the book. I have
it and I suppose I must have read it; the only reaction that comes to
mind is a sense of disappointment.
>
>The one I read before that was _Barrayar_. I was very amused by
>the "Cordelia goes shopping" thing, but when I thought back over
>the book I realized that amusement over that one scene was my
>*only* strong or memorable reaction to it--the rest just slid by.
>In retrospect this made me feel that the book couldn't have been
>all that good, though I enjoyed it while I was reading it.
Interesting. There were a number of scenes which I very much enjoyed,
e.g., the scene where Cordelia plays baba to Koudelko and Drou, and
the scene where Vordarian and Cordelia shock each other.
>
>The best guess I can make about the problem is by referring to the
>scene in one of the short stories where Miles tries to jump a hurdle
>and breaks both his legs. The writer's "camera" pulls back at that
>point--we don't hear how it felt physically, and we don't hear how
>Miles felt about it. The situation as set up is exquisitely painful,
>but it is treated in a mode more normally used for comedy--with
>enough distance to be funny. _The Spirit Ring_ is not anything
>resembling funny--I don't recall laughing at it at all--but it still
>does this pulling-back thing.
>
>I am not saying this is a bad style--it clearly works really well for
>a lot of people. I'm just personally put off by it. Cherryh doing the
>same sort of scene would have me in the head and body of the
>character in pain--and sometimes she overdoes this (the blizzard
>in _Cloud's Rider_) but on balance I like the effect better.
There was an interesting thread, perhaps in this newsgroup, perhaps in
another about the difference between the task oriented perspective and
the feeling oriented perspective, the former more commonly found in
men and the latter more commonly found in women (but not as a
universal rule.) Part of what you call "the plexiglass barrier" may
be a reaction to a perspective difference.
Bujold tends to write about characters who have the task oriented
perspective. Miles is very much a task oriented person - her
depiction of the scene that bothers you is, IMO, correctly written
because the pain, exquisite or not, is not important to Miles. What
he wants to do and achieve is "where he is at" - how he feels is not.
For that matter Cordelia is rather task oriented herself. She is, by
auctorial fiat, good at relationships and feelings. However it is
notable that Bujold slips in the observation by Cordelia that one of
the reasons that Aral (who is explicitly bisexual) is attracted to her
is that she is feminine with the masculine virtues. She is his
Captain.
Science Fiction tends to run to characters with the task oriented
perspective which is convenient if the story is dominated by
action-adventure plotting. For the most part Bujold tends to stay
within that tradition.
Be that as it may, you might like "The Curse of Chalion" better;
it is written more from the feeling perspective.
Captain Button
>>> The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_, and will be out in
>>> May 2002.
>>
>>You mean I have to WAIT? Oh well ... it'll be out in time for my birthday.
> Hmm.... Hopefully the baby and I will have settled down sufficiently
> by then so that I can snag time to read it myself and/or read it to
> the baby. (Who is due in mid-to-late March. And if the ultrasound
> tech is correct and it _is_ a boy, we're calling him Miles.).
Have you put force screens over your windows?
Just to be sure....
--
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Captain Button - but...@io.com
Captain Button
Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on Tue, 20 Nov 2001 05:49:13 +0000, Robert Sneddon <no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <9tbrt3$kqq$1...@nntp3.u.washington.edu>, Mary K. Kuhner
> <mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu> writes
>>
>>The best guess I can make about the problem is by referring to the
>>scene in one of the short stories where Miles tries to jump a hurdle
>>and breaks both his legs. The writer's "camera" pulls back at that
>>point--we don't hear how it felt physically, and we don't hear how
>>Miles felt about it.
> Miles breaks limbs regularly at this point in his life. He's still
> growing, so they haven't replaced the long bones with the plastic
> replacements yet. Observe Bothari's reaction to Miles' accident. He's
> used to pain, bucket-loads of it. He's developed coping methods. He
> copes.
[ snip ]
> [Spoiler for _Memory_ coming up]
> ^L
> Lois does it again when Miles loses his commission -- his seizure chops
> a fellow officer's legs off. The medics can reattach them, but he ends
> up several centimetres shorter. Miles is mortified when he meets the
> officer later, but because of Security considerations he can't even
> apologise to the man. Miles' embarrassment is funny, even though you
> feel a great sympathy for the injured officer.
And then there are the quaddies, who have four arms and no legs.
Should we start a thread talking about the theme of leglessness
in Bujold?
:-)}
Susan Stepney
>
> I don't even want the first sentence, thank you, until I can have all the
> other sentences that follow on after it.
>
> The reason for this is that if I have the first sentence or any knowledge
> at all, I start writing the book in my head, and then I have to get that
> out of my head before I can enjoy the actual book that's in front of me.
>
Two books for the price of one?
(And I want to say "and both written by such good authors, too",
but I can't think of a way to say that without sounding sycophantic,
so I won't.)
Oops.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Susan Stepney tel +44 1223 254890 step...@logica.com
Logica UK Ltd, Betjeman House, 104 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1LQ, UK
http://public.logica.com/~stepneys/ http://www.logica.com/
Kate Nepveu
I've decided that it would probably enhance my first read of a book
if I hadn't read excerpts ahead of time, but I'm not sure I'll be able
to do it. So willpower is an issue for some people.
Kate
--
http://www.steelypips.org/elsewhere.html -- kate....@yale.edu
Paired Reading Page; Book Reviews; Outside of a Dog: A Book Log
"I awoke this morning with devout thanksgiving for my friends."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
Steve Taylor
> Probably weirdness--I decided that reading the ACC excerpts at Baen
> didn't make my life better, and I've got so much to read that I tend
> not to be that desperate for any particular novel. It doesn't take
> any self-control for me to not read the excerpts.
I've proved to myself in the past that I don't get any actual pleasure
from reading a stray chapter of Bujold - I need to read the whole book
to build up enough momentum. Different writers are born to work at
different lengths, and Bujold seesm to be very much a novel length
person - or series length really, as having read previous books in the
Vorkosigan universe adds to the pleasure.
One or two chapters is not enough to even get me interested - I'll wait
(eagerly) for the book.
> Nancy Lebovitz
Steve
--
I confirm that I said it, but I will neither confirm nor deny that I
meant it.
David Eppstein
mkku...@kingman.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) wrote:
> It's also worth noting that when an author has written that many
> books, people who don't like her work (like me) have long ago
> stopped reading it, and so don't have much to say about the new
> one.
Maybe now that she's writing fantasy as well as SF, we can have a split
like with Cherryh where some people like her fantasy and not her SF and
vice versa? I was worried I might be in that camp -- I had a hard time
opening up my copy of _The Curse of Chalion_ -- but I was stuck on an
airplane with it and _Defender_, and Chalion won hands down.
I am still halfway through _Defender_, and will probably finish it soon,
but I am getting irritated at the way CJC's internal monologues read like
badly formatted spaghetti code: if then if then else if then else else if
then else...
Back to Bujold, I did stall out on _Falling Free_ some time ago, and I
think you will not have difficulty finding ardent fans who agree it is not
her best work instead of the fawning and drooling Ian Galbraith complains
of.
--
David Eppstein UC Irvine Dept. of Information & Computer Science
epps...@ics.uci.edu http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/
Christopher J. Henrich
>
> And then there are the quaddies, who have four arms and no legs.
>
> Should we start a thread talking about the theme of leglessness
> in Bujold?
>
> :-)}
>
Tetrapodia is the key insight.
--
Chris Henrich
Offbreed
> A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website. There's quite a
> gap between the end of _ACC_ and the beginning of _DI_. We don't see
> MilesWed, but we do see the results of said Union on the way back from
> the Cabbage Patch on Beta Colony.
Oh, blast. There's all sorts of things that can happen to a man that
don't bother women at all. I was hoping for a "wedding invitation".
Wait a minute. "On the way back from Beta..."? (Never mind, I'll wait
to read it, but...)
> Of course, the really lucky stiffs (like Yr Hmbl Crrspdt) heard Lois
> read chunks from the first *three* chapters at MilPhil. Hehehehe...
Sadist.
Offbreed
> Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
Now, if LMB wanted to add that "rules" list to one of the books...
Robert Sneddon
<Offb...@my-deja.com> writes>news:<koD9gvA4Bv97Ewq
>7...@nojay.fsnet.co.uk>...
>
[Don't read any further, Jo...]
>
>Oh, blast. There's all sorts of things that can happen to a man that
>don't bother women at all. I was hoping for a "wedding invitation".
>
Faint memory tells me Lois may be saving MilesWed for a novella.
>
>> Of course, the really lucky stiffs (like Yr Hmbl Crrspdt) heard Lois
>> read chunks from the first *three* chapters at MilPhil. Hehehehe...
>
>Sadist.
No, Lois is the sadist. Yo know where she *stopped* reading? Talk about
cliffhangers... but I won't tell, as it is a super-major-spoiler. When
you reach the end of Chapter Three in the book, have a good grip on the
safety rope.
Louann Miller
<no...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> No, Lois is the sadist. Yo know where she *stopped* reading? Talk about
>cliffhangers... but I won't tell, as it is a super-major-spoiler. When
>you reach the end of Chapter Three in the book, have a good grip on the
>safety rope.
She read sections of "Barrayar" at a con I attended before the book
had come out. She read the c-section scene and stopped at "oh, shit!"
Louann, who is prepared to be forgiving anyway.
Mark Reichert
news:9tbrt3$kqq$1...@nntp3.u.washington.edu...
> I am not saying this is a bad style--it clearly works really well for
> a lot of people. I'm just personally put off by it. Cherryh doing the
> same sort of scene would have me in the head and body of the
> character in pain--and sometimes she overdoes this (the blizzard
> in _Cloud's Rider_) but on balance I like the effect better.
Which is why I can't stand Cherryh. I don't find it enjoyable to have my
teeth grind while I'm reading.
Bill Snyder
So Miles is exactly four feet tall?
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
Mark Reichert
news:tas-BAE8A2.2...@news1.oakland1.sfba.home.com...
> In article <3bf85608$0$79556$337e...@news.hockey.net>,
> "Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
> > It goes away, I'm afraid. At least for the purposes of the
omnibuses.
> > It may come back on the tide in future single-volume re-prints, someday.
> > _Borders_ is one of the better series-starter books, after all.
>
> That's putting it mildly. I'd describe it as a 'near-freebie crack
> dose'. That book hooked me, it did. Halfway through I knew I was going
> to have to buy the whole series.
Are Ms. Bujold's post showing up in this newsgroup normally? I don't seem
to be getting them, and I just checked to make sure I didn't accidentally
put her in the killfile.
Martin Soederstroem
<je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
>Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
*Looks* *Re-reads* *Slaps forehead*
Am I the only one who took until now to realize that it's a pun?
--
Martin
This is not a sig.
Martin Wisse
wrote:
>Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> The reason for this is that if I have the first sentence or any knowledge
>> at all, I start writing the book in my head, and then I have to get that
>> out of my head before I can enjoy the actual book that's in front of me.
>
>Hmn, I've had problems like that on rereads -- never from just advance
>knowledge of what's going on for a book I haven't read, but for
>something I've read and enjoyed I sometimes think characters should have
>acted /slightly/ different than they did....
Spoilers don't ruin my enjoyment all that much, what's worse is
inaccurate descriptions on back covers and the like, when minor
incidents are blown out of all proportion, or things are mentioned which
just don't happen in the book. Then I'm continuously waiting for that to
happen and can't concentrate on the real book.
Martin Wisse
--
There's a special word for people who set up recorded messages
telling you that "your call is important to us" every five minutes
for two hours. That special word is "liar."
-Patrick Nielsen Hayden, rasseff
Terry Austin
"Martin Soederstroem" <Mart...@privat.utfors.se> wrote in message
news:ia7ovt0dc0vvr5124...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:17:12 GMT, Jerry Brown
> <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
>
> >Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
>
> *Looks* *Re-reads* *Slaps forehead*
>
> Am I the only one who took until now to realize that it's a pun?
Only because he explained it to me.
Terry Austin
Josh Kaderlan
wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:17:12 GMT, Jerry Brown
><je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
>
>>Rather that than Cordelia's shopping list.
>
> *Looks* *Re-reads* *Slaps forehead*
>
> Am I the only one who took until now to realize that it's a pun?
I don't follow. Are you saying "Cordelia's shopping list" is a pun, or
that Jerry Brown's post was a pun?
-Josh
Julie Pascal
"Martin Wisse" <mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:3c481e53....@news.demon.nl...
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:20:16 -0500, pl...@newsreaders.com (J.B. Moreno)
> wrote:
>
> >Jo Walton <J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> The reason for this is that if I have the first sentence or any
knowledge
> >> at all, I start writing the book in my head, and then I have to get
that
> >> out of my head before I can enjoy the actual book that's in front of
me.
> >
> >Hmn, I've had problems like that on rereads -- never from just advance
> >knowledge of what's going on for a book I haven't read, but for
> >something I've read and enjoyed I sometimes think characters should have
> >acted /slightly/ different than they did....
>
> Spoilers don't ruin my enjoyment all that much, what's worse is
> inaccurate descriptions on back covers and the like, when minor
> incidents are blown out of all proportion, or things are mentioned which
> just don't happen in the book. Then I'm continuously waiting for that to
> happen and can't concentrate on the real book.
I generally don't mind slight spoilers on book jackets but because
of the one on _Komarr_ I was able to figure out what the bad
guys were "up to" somewhere around chapter 7.
--Julie
Matt Hickman
> Bujold <lmbu...@qwest.net> writes
> > The new Miles book is titled _Diplomatic Immunity_,
Hmm, I thought she was look for a Shakespeare/poetry quote as the title.
> >
> A chunk of the first chapter is up on the Baen website. There's quite a
> gap between the end of _ACC_ and the beginning of _DI_. We don't see
> MilesWed, but we do see the results of said Union on the way back from
> the Cabbage Patch on Beta Colony.
I wonder if people here and on the mailing list might have guessed a
little bit too close to what LMB planned for Miles' wedding. Especially
in regards to what the Haut Pel was up to. Might have put her off
writing that novel for a while. I'd hate to think it was my own
speculation (re: the "Ivan gets a Haut?" thread) 'cause I would really
like to read that novel.
** Warning do not read the following if noticing minor nits in someone's
writing style can annoy you**
Just got through re-reading most of the Miles books. I started noticing
LMB had the characters 'murmur' what they say -- a lot. When I envision
a character murmuring, I do not expect the other characters to be able
to understand the speach. After all the core of murmuring is its
indistinctness.
Anyway, I started noticing it every time LMB used it. And she used
it often. In _Diplomatic Immunity_, I hope she will have her
characters 'speak softly' or even 'mutter' if the characters
spoken to are suppose to hear and understand what is being said.
--
Matt Hickman
... if it moves, shoot it, If it speaks cut its throat. That
spoils most illusions (Rufo)
Robert A. Heinlein (1907 - 1988)
_Glory Road_ 1963
J.B. Moreno
> > "Lois McMaster Bujold" <lmbu...@qwest.net> wrote:
-snip-
> Are Ms. Bujold's post showing up in this newsgroup normally? I don't seem
> to be getting them, and I just checked to make sure I didn't accidentally
> put her in the killfile.
That depends upon what you mean by "normally" -- she's only a
semi-regular poster and may go months between posts. She's made 3 post
to this thread, and that seems to have been it for the last month.
<news:3bf85608$0$79556$337e...@news.hockey.net>
<news:3bf7ee0f$0$79563$337e...@news.hockey.net>
<news:3bf6abbe$0$79553$337e...@news.hockey.net>
If they don't show up, it's your ISP.
Jim Toth
Martin Wisse <mwi...@ad-astra.demon.nl> wrote:
>Spoilers don't ruin my enjoyment all that much, what's worse is
>inaccurate descriptions on back covers and the like, when minor
>incidents are blown out of all proportion, or things are mentioned which
>just don't happen in the book. Then I'm continuously waiting for that to
>happen and can't concentrate on the real book.
This is why I don't read descriptions on back covers and jacket flaps
until I've read the book. The vast majority of the books I buy are
bought because of others' recommendations or because it's an author I
already know I'll like, so reading the back cover just to see if I'll
like the book rarely happens anymore.
--
Jim Toth
jt...@acm.org
Gene Wirchenko
>"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
>news:bodgvt0dq2pd18adv...@4ax.com...
[snip]
>> What will happen to the linking material that brackets each of the
>> stories in the original version of the 'Borders of Infinity' fix-up
>> book? It can't really stand alone as each chapter ends with a lead in
>> to one of the novellas, and it would be a shame to lose it completely.
> It goes away, I'm afraid. At least for the purposes of the omnibuses.
>It may come back on the tide in future single-volume re-prints, someday.
>_Borders_ is one of the better series-starter books, after all.
Boo, hiss! Just like the appendixes and the chapter headings in
Stirling's "The Domination" omnibus. That was some of the best in the
books in both Stirling's and your stuff.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Gene Wirchenko
>"Htn963" <htn...@cs.com> wrote in message
>news:20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com...
>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>> rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her
>works
>> anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling.
>
>Perhaps because some of us have nothing critical to say? Besides, this is
>rec.arts.sf.written, not rec.arts.sf.critiques. We don't have to be
>critical.
The above plus:
If I don't enjoy an author's works, I don't usually talk about
his work. I'm here to discuss things that I enjoy. Unless something
is a real dog, I'm not going to say anything. I figure that others
are looking for books to read more than books not to read.
Martin Soederstroem
wrote:
>I don't follow. Are you saying "Cordelia's shopping list" is a pun, or
>that Jerry Brown's post was a pun?
Cordelia saying she "went shopping" is a pun. Think about it.
Htn963
>"Mark Reichert" <ma...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Htn963" <htn...@cs.com> wrote in message
>>news:20011118042949...@mb-da.news.cs.com...
>>> Sometimes I think this newsgroup is more like alt.fan.bujold than
>>> rec.arts.sf.written. I hardly ever see real critical discussions of her
>>works
>>> anymore, just "me too" fawning and drooling.
>>
>>Perhaps because some of us have nothing critical to say? Besides, this is
>>rec.arts.sf.written, not rec.arts.sf.critiques. We don't have to be
>>critical.
>
> The above plus:
Geez, by "critical" I mean "substantive." You're allowed to praise, as
long as you give reasons for your praise. This would also help new readers.
OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his nose, then
I suggest you form alt.fan.bujold for your passion, like the Robert Jordan
folks.
> If I don't enjoy an author's works, I don't usually talk about
>his work.
This is a reader's newsgroup, not a writer's. You're under no obligation
to be tactful to the latter.
>I'm here to discuss things that I enjoy.
Then discuss.
> Unless something
>is a real dog, I'm not going to say anything. I figure that others
>are looking for books to read more than books not to read.
Considering that we can only read a miniscule percentage of all existing
books while we live, you'll be doing others much better service by telling
them what books to avoid rather than seek.
>Sincerely,
>
>Gene Wirchenko
>
>Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
> I have preferences.
> You have biases.
> He/She has prejudices.
I don't have prejudices. It's just that my taste is better than yours.
So there.
--
Ht
|Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore
never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
--John Donne, "Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions"|
Jordan S. Bassior
>OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
>hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his nose,
Isn't it amazing how he picks his nose? The beauty, the grace, the intelligence
-- the sheer _power_ of it?
*swoons*
--
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
--
John S. Novak, III
> OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
> hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his nose, then
> I suggest you form alt.fan.bujold for your passion, like the Robert Jordan
> folks.
<Snort>
The more interesting threads in the Jordan group are those which pick
apart the stories, and expose some of the sillier things about the
series.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
The Humblest Man on the Net
Carol Hague
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 02:27:59 -0000, Josh Kaderlan <j...@zer0.org>
> wrote:
>
> >I don't follow. Are you saying "Cordelia's shopping list" is a pun, or
> >that Jerry Brown's post was a pun?
>
> Cordelia saying she "went shopping" is a pun. Think about it.
It's black humour certainly, but not a pun. (I presume you're talking
about _Barrayar_ here?)
--
Carol Hague
Martin Soederstroem
Shopping/chopping isn't a pun?
Thomas Yan
jt...@acm.org (Jim Toth) wrote:
> This is why I don't read descriptions on back covers and jacket flaps
> until I've read the book. The vast majority of the books I buy are
> bought because of others' recommendations or because it's an author I
> already know I'll like, so reading the back cover just to see if I'll
> like the book rarely happens anymore.
I agree, except that after reading Butler's _Parable of the Talents_, I
retroactively wished I *had* first read the jacket. It might have
clued me in that my relatively upbeat expectations were all wrong.
--
Thomas Yan (ty...@twcny.rr.com) Note: I don't check e-mail often.
Be pro-active. Fight sucky software and learned helplessness.
Apologies for any lack of capitalization; typing hurts my hands.
Progress on next DbS installment: pp1-38 of pp1-181 of _Taltos_
Timothy A. McDaniel
Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
>Htn said:
>
>>OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
>>hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his
>>nose,
>
>Isn't it amazing how he picks his nose? The beauty, the grace, the
>intelligence -- the sheer _power_ of it?
>
>*swoons*
You utter dolt. It's not "the beauty, the grace" -- there's nothing
particularly beautiful or graceful (except sometimes intellectually).
It's how Miles's nose *never* expects the particular attack. And
Miles never uses the forceful method -- he never just picks his nose
with a plasma arc, for example. It's the subtle surprise, when the
booger suddenly finds itself being flung into the waste disposal when
it has no idea how it got there.
Though I must say it added a layer of richness of late when Miles has
to start thinking about how he picks his nose, and to what end, and
how it can be done honorably, and whether it's even Naismith's fake
plastic nose or Vorkosigan's nose.
--
Tim McDaniel is tm...@jump.net; if that fail,
tm...@us.ibm.com is my work account.
"To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting everything
up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka....@hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)
Gene Wirchenko
>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
[snip]
>> If I don't enjoy an author's works, I don't usually talk about
>>his work.
>
> This is a reader's newsgroup, not a writer's. You're under no obligation
>to be tactful to the latter.
I'm under no obligation to be tactless either. I wish more
people on USENET applied this.
>>I'm here to discuss things that I enjoy.
>
> Then discuss.
I have and do.
>> Unless something
>>is a real dog, I'm not going to say anything. I figure that others
>>are looking for books to read more than books not to read.
>
> Considering that we can only read a miniscule percentage of all existing
>books while we live, you'll be doing others much better service by telling
>them what books to avoid rather than seek.
The reverse. If there really are so many books Out There, giving
a good target will get a person reading sooner than telling him what
to avoid.
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Gene Wirchenko
>>
>>Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
>> I have preferences.
>> You have biases.
>> He/She has prejudices.
>
> I don't have prejudices. It's just that my taste is better than yours.
>So there.
I'm a lacto-ovovegetarian. I'll let one of the meateaters check
this out.
Julie Pascal
--Julie
"Timothy A. McDaniel" <tm...@jump.net> wrote in message
news:KacM7.157$gd.144878@news20...
Carol Hague
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:16:54 +0000, carol...@onetel.net.uk (Carol
> Hague) wrote:
>
> >Martin Soederstroem <Mart...@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
> >> Cordelia saying she "went shopping" is a pun. Think about it.
> >
> >It's black humour certainly, but not a pun. (I presume you're talking
> >about _Barrayar_ here?)
>
> Shopping/chopping isn't a pun?
Believe it or not, I never read it that way until you pointed it out -
I thought she was just being sarcastic about Piotr's views on suitable
occupations for women...
--
Carol Hague
Gareth Wilson
> LOL... you guys are a riot... hehe...
I note that there is actual nose-picking content in _The Vor Game_, although
perhaps you didn't want to know that...
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gareth Wilson
Christchurch
New Zealand
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Harter
Hague) wrote:
>Martin Soederstroem <Mart...@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:16:54 +0000, carol...@onetel.net.uk (Carol
>> Hague) wrote:
>>
>> >Martin Soederstroem <Mart...@privat.utfors.se> wrote:
>
>> >> Cordelia saying she "went shopping" is a pun. Think about it.
>> >
>> >It's black humour certainly, but not a pun. (I presume you're talking
>> >about _Barrayar_ here?)
>>
>> Shopping/chopping isn't a pun?
>
>Believe it or not, I never read it that way until you pointed it out -
>I thought she was just being sarcastic about Piotr's views on suitable
>occupations for women...
I don't explicitly know what the rules are but I am quite sure that it
is not a pun (and I am notorious for my puns.) Perhaps someone could
explain to us when and why word play counts as a pun.
Richard Harter, c...@tiac.net,
http://www.tiac.net/users/cri, http://www.varinoma.com
Remember: If you're going to practice cannibalism, do so responsibly.
Friends don't let friends eat friends. - Richard Clayton
Timothy A. McDaniel
Gareth Wilson <gr...@ext.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
>Julie Pascal wrote:
>
>> LOL... you guys are a riot... hehe...
>
>I note that there is actual nose-picking content in _The Vor Game_,
>although perhaps you didn't want to know that...
Um, I'm afraid I don't recall that scene. Precis?
The Great Gray Skwid
> In article <20011124124136...@mb-fe.news.cs.com>, Htn963 wrote:
> > OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
> > hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his nose, then
> > I suggest you form alt.fan.bujold for your passion, like the Robert Jordan
> > folks.
> <Snort>
> The more interesting threads in the Jordan group are those which pick
> apart the stories, and expose some of the sillier things about the
> series.
While I've never used a server with sufficient lack of self respect to
carry the bogus group alt.fan.robert-jordan (which would be the group to
compare to a proposed a.f.bujold), from what I've seen via crossposts it
seems the most interesting thread over there would be about picking one's
own nose.
In contrast, rasfwl-b (rasfwl-m-b?) might have a better chance to foster
a reasonable and interesting community, as rasfwr-j has (Ht's obviously
misdirected opinion ignored, of course).
--
| | |\ | | | ) Theudegisklos "Skwid" Sweinbrothar
|/| |\ |/ | |X| ( SKWID, Vulture V4 pilot ( The Humblest Mollusc
| | | | | | | ) Evan "Skwid" Langlinais ) on the Net
"The Pathetic Mewling of Freshly Weaned Wussies" -- Red Meat
Louann Miller
<sk...@grandamgt.com> wrote:
>> In article <20011124124136...@mb-fe.news.cs.com>, Htn963 wrote:
>> > OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
>> > hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his nose, then
>> > I suggest you form alt.fan.bujold for your passion, like the Robert Jordan
>> > folks.
>While I've never used a server with sufficient lack of self respect to
>carry the bogus group alt.fan.robert-jordan (which would be the group to
>compare to a proposed a.f.bujold), from what I've seen via crossposts it
>seems the most interesting thread over there would be about picking one's
>own nose.
>In contrast, rasfwl-b (rasfwl-m-b?) might have a better chance to foster
>a reasonable and interesting community, as rasfwr-j has (Ht's obviously
>misdirected opinion ignored, of course).
There is already a reasonable and interesting community of Bujold
fans, only it's a mailing list. http://www.dendarii.com/mail_list.html
for details. Bujold is a list member and posts on occasion. There have
been two listee-meets-listee marriages that I know of.
There are the occasional full-and-frank-exchanges-of-views over
controversial topics like *b*rt**n, g*n c*ntr*l, H*n*r H*rr*ngt*n and,
for some reason, socialized medicine. But on the whole it's one of the
most civilized and entertaining groups of smart people I've ever hung
out with online.
Louann
Julie Pascal
> In article <3C020BCF...@ext.canterbury.ac.nz>,
> Gareth Wilson <gr...@ext.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> >Julie Pascal wrote:
> >
> >> LOL... you guys are a riot... hehe...
> >
> >I note that there is actual nose-picking content in _The Vor Game_,
> >although perhaps you didn't want to know that...
>
> Um, I'm afraid I don't recall that scene. Precis?
I can't think of it either. Did Miles get sniffly in Illyan's
office when his dad was there?
NO!... oops...
But he doesn't *pick* his nose... he does *blow* it...
and well, later he sticks filters up his nose. I'd forgotten
that. :-)
Now, wasn't that a gloriously comic scene? Did it not
perfectly show just how superior our hero is? Did he
not out-think his adversary in the most clever way?
*sigh*
--Julie
Julie Pascal
"Louann Miller" <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gi450u455s9oo73k1...@4ax.com...
> >> In article <20011124124136...@mb-fe.news.cs.com>, Htn963
wrote:
> >> > OTOH, if you just want to gossip knowingly with each other in
> >> > hundred-posts mutual-admiration threads every time Miles picks his
nose, then
> >> > I suggest you form alt.fan.bujold for your passion, like the Robert
Jordan
> >> > folks.
(...)
> There is already a reasonable and interesting community of Bujold
> fans, only it's a mailing list. http://www.dendarii.com/mail_list.html
> for details. Bujold is a list member and posts on occasion. There have
> been two listee-meets-listee marriages that I know of.
(...)
There is also the forum on Baen's Bar. Baen.com will get
you there.
--Julie
Gene Wirchenko
>Julie Pascal wrote:
>
>> LOL... you guys are a riot... hehe...
>
>I note that there is actual nose-picking content in _The Vor Game_, although
>perhaps you didn't want to know that...
The award for Worst Excuse for Rereading goes to Gareth Wilson.
You'll excuse me if I don't shake your hand.
Gareth Wilson
> But he doesn't *pick* his nose... he does *blow* it...
> and well, later he sticks filters up his nose. I'd forgotten
> that. :-)
Right, my mistake.
Htn963
> htn...@cs.com (Htn963) wrote:
>
> >Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> If I don't enjoy an author's works, I don't usually talk about
> >>his work.
> >
> > This is a reader's newsgroup, not a writer's. You're under no obligation
> >to be tactful to the latter.
>
> I'm under no obligation to be tactless either. I wish more
> people on USENET applied this.
Indeed, tell that to the authors also, especially the Flints and
the Ringos.
But in any case...
I am direct.
You are blunt.
He/she is tactless.
> >>I'm here to discuss things that I enjoy.
> >
> > Then discuss.
>
> I have and do.
Not in this thread, you haven't. So why do you like reading
Bujold?
> >> Unless something
> >>is a real dog, I'm not going to say anything. I figure that others
> >>are looking for books to read more than books not to read.
> >
> > Considering that we can only read a miniscule percentage of all existing
> >books while we live, you'll be doing others much better service by telling
> >them what books to avoid rather than seek.
>
> The reverse. If there really are so many books Out There, giving
> a good target will get a person reading sooner than telling him what
> to avoid.
I'm sure you're worth listening to, but nowadays you'll also be
competing with the media, Oprah, and all the other blurb writers out
there for a potential reader's attention. "Works of genius" are a
dime a dozen -- but time wisely spent in actually reading something
you enjoy is priceless.
> >>Sincerely,
> >>
> >>Gene Wirchenko
> >>
> >>Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
> >> I have preferences.
> >> You have biases.
> >> He/She has prejudices.
> >
> > I don't have prejudices. It's just that my taste is better than yours.
> >So there.
>
> I'm a lacto-ovovegetarian. I'll let one of the meateaters check
> this out.
Hmm, as if being Canadian wasn't bland enough already. <Ducks.>
--
Ht
Louann Miller
wrote:
>"Louann Miller" <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> There is already a reasonable and interesting community of Bujold
>> fans, only it's a mailing list. http://www.dendarii.com/mail_list.html
>There is also the forum on Baen's Bar. Baen.com will get
>you there.
I've had enough trouble over time with the Baen's Bar interface that
I've pretty well given up on it.
Captain Button
Are you talking about the Web interface?
I am told that you can access Baen's Bar by NNTP, ie the standard
way using normal newsreaders.
On 27Jan2001 Michael Chase told me on this topic (in
alt.books.david-weber):
>>>
The nntp server is bar.baen.com. You will need to sign up for
the Bar first so you have an account and password.
<<<
But I've never gotten around to trying it.
--
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Captain Button - but...@io.com
George S. Vaughan
wrote:
[Regarding the bujold mailing list]
>There are the occasional full-and-frank-exchanges-of-views over
>controversial topics like *b*rt**n, g*n c*ntr*l, H*n*r H*rr*ngt*n and,
>for some reason, socialized medicine. But on the whole it's one of the
>most civilized and entertaining groups of smart people I've ever hung
>out with online.
Not to mention civilized, but the polygamous witch with a
lower-than-expected granola quotient seems to be one of the best
Christians it has been my privilege to know.
J.B. Moreno
> Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Julie Pascal" <ju...@pascal.org> wrote:
> >>"Louann Miller" <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>> There is already a reasonable and interesting community of Bujold
> >>> fans, only it's a mailing list. http://www.dendarii.com/mail_list.html
>
> >>There is also the forum on Baen's Bar. Baen.com will get
> >>you there.
>
> > I've had enough trouble over time with the Baen's Bar interface that
> > I've pretty well given up on it.
>
> Are you talking about the Web interface?
>
> I am told that you can access Baen's Bar by NNTP, ie the standard
> way using normal newsreaders.
That's correct, although it leaves out the fact that due to it also
being a mailing list (and Baen being an OE user [i.e. no skipping quoted
text for him]) most people top post -- which of course makes it hard to
read.
> On 27Jan2001 Michael Chase told me on this topic (in
> alt.books.david-weber):
>
> >>>
> The nntp server is bar.baen.com. You will need to sign up for
> the Bar first so you have an account and password.
> <<<
>
> But I've never gotten around to trying it.
I have and the above is correct -- minor caveat: it's not at all unusual
for the NNTP server to go down for a day or so every couple of weeks.
--
JBM
"Your depression will be added to my own" -- Marvin of Borg