|
mystes posted:Yes, it's probably a safe bet that the Gap Cycle is along the lines of the Gap Cycle.  Damnit, I thought he said Scott Hamilton, not Donaldson.
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
Seldom Posts posted:Felix Gilman's The Half Made World is complex in terms of theme, but the plot is straightforward. The prose is also better than average. And the sequel is far better, which is saying something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:I'd think it was a parody, if all reviews of the author's other books did not confirm that he is, in fact, completely serious and genuinely trying to mentor his readers in Christian ethics. There are no words. Nope, sounds about right. I have some affection for his Warlock books but mostly because I read them as a kid and pretty much everything flew over my head.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
The Duck of Death posted:Cool, thanks for the rec. I'm picking up House of Suns today and I'll add this to my list. In case you go looking for a book called Dread Empire's Fall and can't find it: the books in the series are The Praxis, The Sundering and Conventions of War.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
Also, you're not going to find anything close to The Gap Cycle in sci-fi. It's thoroughly unique.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 01:44
|
|
|
More to the point, The Praxis/Dread Empire's Fall isn't gritty or dark much at all. I've harped on it before, but they're mostly notable because, despite being space opera and quasi-militaryish sci-fi, the protagonists aren't perfect. But the antagonists are perfectly incompetent, so it doesn't matter. I love the genre, but those books are thoroughly forgetable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
regularizer posted:And the sequel is far better, which is saying something. Really? I found the world in the first fascinating, but ultimately the story was kinda flat. Is the sequel better in that regard?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:I'm currently trying to read Christopher Stasheff's "Her Majesty's Wizard," and it might just be the worst thing I've ever laid eyes on. It's like reading Terry Goodkind, but instead of shoving Objectivism down your throat, it's medieval Catholicism. This thing really is loving bad. I read a little bit of 'A Wizard in Rhyme', which is the first in that series, I think, because I found the idea of magic being worked by poetry cute, but holy poo poo is it badly written. The prose is garbage of the highest order.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 08:17
|
|
|
Fallom posted:Also, you're not going to find anything close to The Gap Cycle in sci-fi. It's thoroughly unique. It's still Donaldson, and I don't know whether I want to read anything more by him after going through the first 2 of the Thomas Covenant trilogies. I've heard interesting things about it, but I keep putting it further down my list. Donaldson is better at torturing his protagonists than both Hobb and Tad Williams, which is a feat all by itself. On something else, I saw that Dan Simmons had a book called Abominable. Anyone read it? Despite it being Simmons, he did The Terror really good, except the ending, so another book about snow, monsters and survival sounds interesting. Maybe we get to meet some Mi-Go?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 09:34
|
|
|
 quote:In The Magician’s Land, the stunning conclusion to the New York Times bestselling Magicians trilogy—on-sale from Viking on August 5—Quentin Coldwater has been cast out of Fillory, the secret magical land of his childhood dreams. With nothing left to lose he returns to where his story began, the Brakebills Preparatory College of Magic. But he can’t hide from his past, and it’s not long before it comes looking for him. Released August 5, 2014
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 11:59
|
|
|
Neurosis posted:This thing really is loving bad. I read a little bit of 'A Wizard in Rhyme', which is the first in that series, I think, because I found the idea of magic being worked by poetry cute, but holy poo poo is it badly written. The prose is garbage of the highest order.  It's like a trainwreck, I just can't stop watching.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 13:42
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:On something else, I saw that Dan Simmons had a book called Abominable. It's not bad. More straightforward and thriller-ish than previous work. Believable and interesting characters/setting: climbers set out to recover something from Everest in 1925 amidst secrecy and intrigue. And the worst macguffin in recent literary history. No seriously, this is a huge spoiler, don't read unless you have no interest in reading this book: the object of the quest turns out to be a set of photographs of Hitler loving and sucking young boys. I'm not kidding. SIMMONS!!  I would recommend reading the first three chapters and then deciding whether to finish. It's readable and worthwhile, especially if you like climbing set-pieces, but don't expect his best novel. Nice change of pace though since there is basically no supernatural element; the Yeti only appear once and off-screen and I look forward to more work in that vein.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
mdemone posted:It's not bad. More straightforward and thriller-ish than previous work. Believable and interesting characters/setting: climbers set out to recover something from Everest in 1925 amidst secrecy and intrigue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
Mi-go would've been much cooler and a better use of his suspense building since that is one thing he is good at and the mi-go are loving creepy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
The kindle version of London Falling by Paul Cornell is currently £0.89 on Amazon UK, I've had this on my wishlist for a while, and i've heard it billed as more of a gritty-style PC Grant novel? For 89p though, might as well take a punt. Edit: Someone also mentioned Stealing Light by Gary Gibson on the last page, that's down to £1.19, what the devil is going on. ed balls balls man fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Nov 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
ed balls balls man posted:The kindle version of London Falling by Paul Cornell is currently £0.89 on Amazon UK, I've had this on my wishlist for a while, and i've heard it billed as more of a gritty-style PC Grant novel? For 89p though, might as well take a punt. It's pretty awesome but it's closer to outright horror than it is to the sort of chummy english fantasy cop movie that is PC Grant. Not just "gritty" but actually terrifying in places.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
mdemone posted:It's not bad. More straightforward and thriller-ish than previous work. Believable and interesting characters/setting: climbers set out to recover something from Everest in 1925 amidst secrecy and intrigue. That sounds hilarious. I kind of want to read it now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:
The second book was regrettable enough that I'm not too inclined to get number three.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
fritz posted:The second book was regrettable enough that I'm not too inclined to get number three. Who even are you? I'm upset I still have to wait another 9 months. ed balls balls man posted:The kindle version of London Falling by Paul Cornell is currently £0.89 on Amazon UK, I've had this on my wishlist for a while, and i've heard it billed as more of a gritty-style PC Grant novel? For 89p though, might as well take a punt. I liked London Falling a lot, but the beginning of the book almost put me off because it was initially very hard to tell the characters apart. Not as good as the PC Grant books, but it was still very strong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
fritz posted:The second book was regrettable enough that I'm not too inclined to get number three. Yeah, I feel the same way. Didn't so much drop the ball as hurl it away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Yeah, I feel the same way. Didn't so much drop the ball as hurl it away. I enjoyed the second one, though not as much as the first obviously. But the weird thing is: each time I heard there's a sequel coming, I get surprised. It's like each book ended in a pretty good spot which really didn't need a sequel or should even have one. EDIT: Which may be a weird thing to say given how the first book ended, but the open-endedness was just fitting I thought. Vinterstum fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Nov 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
regularizer posted:Who even are you? I'm upset I still have to wait another 9 months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 03:56
|
|
|
fritz posted:The second book was regrettable enough that I'm not too inclined to get number three. Second? I absolutely hated The Magicians so much that I'm avoiding anything written by him in the future. Including articles and reviews. I have never read a book that was so far up it's own rear end before. I slogged through it hoping it would get better - it never does. Later, I find out he deliberately made magic boring and mundane and the characters contemptible. On purpose. You know, as a reversal from the normal childlike wonder / coolness of magic and interesting characters. It was anti-fun. And anti-enjoyable to read. The entire book felt like some weird New York hipster statement on the pointless of the entire genre and life in general. What really bled through was the author's contempt for his own book and, by extension, anyone who would waste their time reading it. So I too hated the book. I guess he... won? And I didn't even have to bring up the furry rape scene. Edit: Oh yeah - I didn't like Stealing Light either. Not because it wasn't well written or interesting, but because I couldn't agree with the underlying premise (serious spoiler, careful) that every race ever blows themselves up when given star destroying technology. Period. No exceptions. I find it simply too jarring / upsetting / unrealistic / depressing to read an entire series that follows people trying to actively destroy FTL tech. I guess I'm too firmly in the David Brin camp of "technology is a net positive" and enjoy escapist fiction. Bhodi fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Nov 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
I'm watching 2010 after reading the book and I really hate what they left out and added. Obviously it's the old "the book was better" thing but the kept 2001 pretty close to the book. I love Roy Schieder too. What a waste of a movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 07:08
|
|
|
regularizer posted:I liked London Falling a lot, but the beginning of the book almost put me off because it was initially very hard to tell the characters apart. Not as good as the PC Grant books, but it was still very strong. Yeah, the beginning is a bit rough. Just get through it, it gets really, really good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
I read flight of the nighthawks years ago when it first came out, and I keep coming across subsequent books in secondhand stores for ridiculously embarrassing prices in hardcover. So, is Feist circling drain or has it picked up? I thought the Serpent War saga was great even when reread recently, and I thought Exiles Return was probably the best out of the last four recent I read
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:Second? I absolutely hated The Magicians so much that I'm avoiding anything written by him in the future. Including articles and reviews. I have never read a book that was so far up it's own rear end before. I slogged through it hoping it would get better - it never does. Later, I find out he deliberately made magic boring and mundane and the characters contemptible. On purpose. You know, as a reversal from the normal childlike wonder / coolness of magic and interesting characters. It was anti-fun. And anti-enjoyable to read. I've been struggling for a way to express my lack of fondness for this book for a while, but the characterization of the book as a hipster is pretty accurate. There's very clearly no joy in it or anything written in it, and I get that that's the point, but it just strikes me as a point that's been made to death and wasn't that interesting the first time. Where someone like Abercrombie does darkness and cynicism well enough that they shape and create a world, this book just sort of seems like a teenager trying to be edgy by telling you there's no god. No offense to those who loved the book, of course. I finished it, so naturally I can't deny that it's well-written, but I'm not keen on returning to its series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 11:40
|
|
|
LmaoTheKid posted:I'm watching 2010 after reading the book and I really hate what they left out and added. Obviously it's the old "the book was better" thing but the kept 2001 pretty close to the book. I love Roy Schieder too. What a waste of a movie. They didn't exactly keep 2001 close to the book; they were written at the same time, and informed each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
anathenema posted:I've been struggling for a way to express my lack of fondness for this book for a while, but the characterization of the book as a hipster is pretty accurate. There's very clearly no joy in it or anything written in it, and I get that that's the point, but it just strikes me as a point that's been made to death and wasn't that interesting the first time. Where someone like Abercrombie does darkness and cynicism well enough that they shape and create a world, this book just sort of seems like a teenager trying to be edgy by telling you there's no god. I don't disagree with you at all, but I just wanted to add that this is pretty weird because Lev seems to genuinely loving love Narnia. I dunno!
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
I don't think it's true that there's no joy in The Magicians. There's plenty to be found in fake hogwarts and fake narnia, and it most commonly surfaces when the characters are least focused on trying to find happiness. Thus the New York scenes end up the least joyful. I won't say they're particularly pleasant to read through but they do serve a purpose. At the same time I completely understand how someone wouldn't see the joy in the book. Some people are going to understand it and some people aren't. I'd make a reference to Catcher In the Rye but I think that's played out by now. I'm still not quite sure how I felt about the second book but I will definitely read the third. Maybe it'll provide some amount of closure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
Who wants to see some horrible opinions from horrible ex-libertarian now-hardcore-catholic John C. Wright? I hope its you. quote:Also a woman who is crude inspires contempt, because she has contempt for God and man. The difference is that a woman who loses her native delicacy and modesty does not become an object of fear and respect, but an object of contempt and loathing, because the aura of sanctity women naturally inspire in men is tossed away.  http://www.scifiwright.com/2013/11/saving-science-fiction-from-strong-female-characters-part-1/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Wright_(author)
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
That post makes Eilonwy cry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
fritz posted:Who wants to see some horrible opinions from horrible ex-libertarian now-hardcore-catholic John C. Wright? gently caress that 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
How many Tea Party creeps are there actually writing mainstream fantasy and sci-fi? I've come to these genres recently and I keep stumbling on these Dan Simmons and Orson Scott Card nutters and every time I look up any recommendation I dread googling the author and finding them going on a rant about feminazis and Muslim Obama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
It's interesting how many Mormons seem into fantasy/sci-fi. Did Orson Scott Card start that tradition, or is it something else? I did the online version of Sanderson's Write About Dragons this year, which was at BYU (a Mormon university). He brought in a lot of guest lecturers, and all of them were of course Mormon. People like Sanderson are weirdly practical about their religions; Sanderson said some odd stuff such as (all quoted from memory, so not direct quotes): quote:"We've all seen the Mormon edits of Die Hard." quote:"While at conventions, I would go to the bar and chat up agents. They'd be drinking their beer or scotch, and I'd come up with my Sprite. I don't even like Sprite, but I'm a Mormon in a bar, so what am I going to do?" quote:"So when you're doing your taxes, you can deduct your home office as a business expense to the government. As for your tithing to the LDS, it's up to you if you want to count the pre or post-deduction amount for your percentage... just do whatever you feel comfortable with." By contrast, he talks about motivating himself to write by getting to open up a new pack of M:TG cards whenever he finishes editing a chapter. And none of his books or subject matter really feel "Mormon." All of these Mormons that lectured for his class felt like very modern people who were not particularly crazy or "tea party" etc., but if they hit certain topics or areas, they just felt kind of weird and alien. I've never known a Mormon in real life, so it struck me as more odd than it will to people living on the Southwest U.S., I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
Max Awfuls posted:How many Tea Party creeps are there actually writing mainstream fantasy and sci-fi? I've come to these genres recently and I keep stumbling on these Dan Simmons and Orson Scott Card nutters and every time I look up any recommendation I dread googling the author and finding them going on a rant about feminazis and Muslim Obama. Larry Correia is a Mormon Republican who really, really likes guns and hates Obamacare, etc, but generally he seems to not be a dick about things. John C Wright, on the other hand, I think might be certifiably insane at this point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
systran posted:It's interesting how many Mormons seem into fantasy/sci-fi. Did Orson Scott Card start that tradition, or was it someone else? Joseph Smith  (Yeah, I had to edit it a bit.) Although I'm reliably informed that even if they wear odd underwear and call Jews "gentiles" they're all different people with, you know, personalities and all those high-level characteristion tips and tricks. fritz posted:Who wants to see some horrible opinions from horrible ex-libertarian now-hardcore-catholic John C. Wright? It wasn't, stop posting horrid things in my nice thread  Even when Wright's not talking bigoted crap like this it's just painful to read.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
Max Awfuls posted:How many Tea Party creeps are there actually writing mainstream fantasy and sci-fi? I've come to these genres recently and I keep stumbling on these Dan Simmons and Orson Scott Card nutters and every time I look up any recommendation I dread googling the author and finding them going on a rant about feminazis and Muslim Obama. The genre is full of those kind of assholes, and more kinds than that, and has been for years and years and years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
I just glanced over this epic shitpost of Wright's and the comments section and now I want to die. Thanks, thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
Bhodi posted:Second? I absolutely hated The Magicians so much that I'm avoiding anything written by him in the future. Including articles and reviews. I have never read a book that was so far up it's own rear end before. I slogged through it hoping it would get better - it never does. Later, I find out he deliberately made magic boring and mundane and the characters contemptible. On purpose. You know, as a reversal from the normal childlike wonder / coolness of magic and interesting characters. It was anti-fun. And anti-enjoyable to read. anathenema posted:I've been struggling for a way to express my lack of fondness for this book for a while, but the characterization of the book as a hipster is pretty accurate. There's very clearly no joy in it or anything written in it, and I get that that's the point, but it just strikes me as a point that's been made to death and wasn't that interesting the first time. Where someone like Abercrombie does darkness and cynicism well enough that they shape and create a world, this book just sort of seems like a teenager trying to be edgy by telling you there's no god. So, I just finished this book, after this thread prompted me to check it out, and I think... it's almost the exact opposite or this? Or, the converse or whatever. It is anti-hipster. It is a book that hates hipsters. It transports you into the universe of Hipsterdom and shows you just how empty and numb and loving meaningless the whole thing is. If affected disaffection and ennui ever appealed to me, they sure as hell don't now. From the second half on, all I wanted to do was pick Quentin up by his lapels and shake him and scream, "Would you just loving care about something, for once in your life?!" Or, if you want to slice it another way, it is a brutally uncompromising and unapologetic look at what life is like for a person with chronic depression. Not that either of those takes makes it any more pleasant to read, I guess. I think if there's anything I'm going to take away from this book, it's going to be an abiding distaste for GenX-ers. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Nov 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2013 03:17
|
|
