|
OmniBeer posted:I like Schaefer's books, and I follow him on Twitter, so I just saw this post and it made me wonder who here emailed him, haha. Goodness deary me, that's ridiculous.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
So I've been reading Sandman Slim. First few books are okay, but I'm having trouble figuring out if I missed a book somewhere because the next book in the series has the primary villain (Aelita, not Mason) written out off-screen (Went from Devil Said Bang to The Getaway God because of the order the books were listed in the the Kindle editions). Did I miss something? What the hell is Marshall Wells doing in charge of things and giving jobs to Stark again? He was sent to prison in like, book two, and now he's back with no explanation? Some Pinko Commie fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:So I've been reading Sandman Slim. First few books are okay, but I'm having trouble figuring out if I missed a book somewhere because the next book in the series has the primary villain (Aelita, not Mason) written out off-screen (Went from Aloha From Hell to The Getaway God because of the order the books were listed in the the Kindle editions). Did I miss something? I haven't read all of the Sandman Slim books, and I don't remember the plot too well, but Wikipedia says there are 2,5 books between Aloha From Hell and The Getaway God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Kadrey#Bibliography
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
I have read quite a few of the Sandman Slim books. Quite recently in fact. But I literally cannot remember a single thing about them. That's how much of an impact they made on me I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
Apoffys posted:I haven't read all of the Sandman Slim books, and I don't remember the plot too well, but Wikipedia says there are 2,5 books between Aloha From Hell and The Getaway God. Sorry, called off the wrong book title, Devil Said Bang was the last one I read before Getaway God. So I need to backtrack and read Kill City Blues. darth cookie posted:I have read quite a few of the Sandman Slim books. Quite recently in fact. But I literally cannot remember a single thing about them. That's how much of an impact they made on me I guess. They kind of remind me of Alex Verus with the protagonist never *really* being threatened by anything and brute forcing his way through any opposition; except cranked to 11.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:They kind of remind me of Alex Verus with the protagonist never *really* being threatened by anything and brute forcing his way through any opposition; except cranked to 11. That seems like more of an Iron Druid thing than an Alex Verus thing, imo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Khizan posted:That seems like more of an Iron Druid thing than an Alex Verus thing, imo. Alex is less annoying than Atticus, and James Stark's personality reminds me more of Alex.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:They kind of remind me of Alex Verus with the protagonist never *really* being threatened by anything and brute forcing his way through any opposition; except cranked to 11. Except I like Alex Verus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Grimson posted:I just re-read the first book over the past couple days, and a question occurred to me: How did Harry hang on to Bob the skull? I'm pretty sure this is covered in passing somewhere in-or-around the second hiding of Bob the Skull, along with the swords, in Turn Coat. Harry hides his contraband in a hole in Lea's garden. I seem to remember him recognizing the place (sans giant centipede, of course) and asks her how it's on the NN-side of his apartment--since he's been to her garden before, and it wasn't here. She says it was incredibly costly to re-align its NN location, but totally worth it to protect her godson, or somesuch. I'll have to go back and look at some point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
The reason Alex isn't *really* threatened by much is he's willing to put on the black hat to protect himself. This has the predictable effect of making all his friends abandon him for being, well, kind of evil, and I think that is actually a lot worse for him in the long run than spending time in the hospital would be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Yeah, that is the thing I like about Alex. I was kinda 'eh' on the earlier books but once it became clear the author was willing to embrace "Alex is kind of a shithead" it really helped it find a comfortable niche. It walks a fine line between making him still sympathetic and emphasizing that he's pretty hosed up but it helps that the author is willing to call him on poo poo without giving him much quarter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
He's really not that much different than Harry in that regard. It's just that, and I never thought I'd say this, it's just that Harry is more diplomatic about it. Harry at least attempts to feel bad and justify his actions. His enemies end up dead but it's usually, publicly, a last resort. Alex just kills some fools and builds a reputation of "don't gently caress with me" out of the corpses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:He's really not that much different than Harry in that regard. Harry, by and large, doesn't actually do many very bad things. He feels guilty about every mistake he makes but he is by and large a selfless and self-sacrificing hero who fears that he could be worse, and everyone who is out to get him tends to be a bad person who brought whatever Harry gave them onto themselves. Alex is the guy who Dresden fears being.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
I don't exactly get where you're coming from here. It's not like Alex learned those adepts were after him and straight up smoked them. Dude busted his rear end trying not to kill them, but he couldn't find a way out of it. It came down to a "me or them" decision and he decided on the "me". Yes, they wanted revenge for some horrible poo poo he did in his past, but does that mean his choices are "lay down and die" or "be evil"? And as far as everything else goes, his hand's been forced pretty much every time since he's run away from Richard, and none of that stuff was revenge for past wrongs, it was all defense of self or friends. It ain't like he's going out of his way to rack up a body count. Is this a case of "once evil always evil" or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Khizan posted:I don't exactly get where you're coming from here. No, Alex takes actual satisfaction in killing people. That is part of what scares him about even himself. Sonder even calls him on it and he's basically unable to argue it. On top of that he's incredibly self-centered and selfish. He cares a lot about his friends far less so for anyone who doesn't fall into that category. He is a bad person. He doesn't want to be but the depth to which he is a bad person isn't clear even to himself until it is forced out. He was trained by a nasty horrific person and despite rejecting him he took a lot of what he said and internalized it. The books unambigiously state that he may be a bad influence on the people around him and might be teaching them the wrong things without realizing it. That is what makes him an interesting character. He is not a good person who occasionally does bad things. He is a bad person who occasionally does good things. With Harry Dresden there isn't ever any real long-term doubt that he'll do the right thing and that he is Good People without an outside source like the Winter Mantle influencing him. At worst he's kind of a poo poo. With Alex it is a legitimate question. (He'll probably end up becoming a heroic figure by the end of his story but he isn't there yet.) He isn't heroic. He is, at best, someone who wants to be left alone and not have anyone bother him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:No, Alex takes actual satisfaction in killing people. That is part of what scares him about even himself. Sonder even calls him on it and he's basically unable to argue it. On top of that he's incredibly self-centered and selfish. He cares a lot about his friends far less so for anyone who doesn't fall into that category. He is a bad person. He doesn't want to be but the depth to which he is a bad person isn't clear even to himself until it is forced out. He was trained by a nasty horrific person and despite rejecting him he took a lot of what he said and internalized it. The books unambigiously state that he may be a bad influence on the people around him and might be teaching them the wrong things without realizing it. I wouldn't go that far. He's done some nasty things but in a lot of cases he didn't really have any other option. He may not be a good person but I wouldn't call him a bad person either. He goes out of his way to avoid conflict, it's just that he's utterly ruthless when someone forces him into it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Harry, by and large, doesn't actually do many very bad things. He feels guilty about every mistake he makes but he is by and large a selfless and self-sacrificing hero who fears that he could be worse, and everyone who is out to get him tends to be a bad person who brought whatever Harry gave them onto themselves. Harry does a poo poo load of bad stuff. He feels bad about it, doesn't do it for personal gain, and goes out of his way to help people, but that doesn't change the fact that said help invariably involves him climbing over a mountain of freshly made corpses leaving a trail of wanton destruction. Violence is his first course of action; until Turn Coat it is his only course of action. Dude is quick to anger, casually lethal, cruel, and has a poo poo load of power he does not hesitate to use. He threatens, extorts, and assaults people, he tortures, he slaughters thinking, reasoning beings who are themselves fully realized people to their own even if Harry doesn't see it that way. It is the catch-22 that a "hero" that kills so freely isn't much of a hero, but a hero has to do bad things and be scary to be a hero in the first place - after all, if the regular people aren't afraid of your hero, why would the villain fear them? And if the villain could be reasoned with and talked down, why do they need a hero? Butcher is well aware of that dynamic as well, which is why he calls that out in the text - everyone is terrified of Harry, when we get exposed to other points of view we see how frightening it is. But he balances it and makes Harry a good guy who does a lot of very bad things through two tricks. Firstly he uses first person POV to make what Harry does seems softer to us than it is. We see things as harry does, and see his justification, reasoning, intent, shock, horror, regret, and pain. He is able to stand in for the reader, and address the issue by having one of his long running doubts be how can he be the good guy when he is doing all this stuff he knows is wrong. Secondly, he adopts a CS Lewis intentionalist stance in how magic works in his universe, and the morality of it. That allows Harry be the equivalent of a human wrecking ball, but still be ethically right within the narrative because it wasn't his intent to cause all that mayhem, he just did it on the way of trying to do something else. Like Michael says, what goes around comes around and Harry is what comes around (and later he is explicitly the toll of divine justice)
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
It'll be interesting to see Evil Harry in a few years, when Mirror Mirror comes out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Harry does a poo poo load of bad stuff. He feels bad about it, doesn't do it for personal gain, and goes out of his way to help people, but that doesn't change the fact that said help invariably involves him climbing over a mountain of freshly made corpses leaving a trail of wanton destruction. Violence is his first course of action; until Turn Coat it is his only course of action. Dude is quick to anger, casually lethal, cruel, and has a poo poo load of power he does not hesitate to use. He threatens, extorts, and assaults people, he tortures, he slaughters thinking, reasoning beings who are themselves fully realized people to their own even if Harry doesn't see it that way. Harry kills a lot of people but by and large his actions are presented in such an ethically right way that he has literal divine angels and ni-flawless paladins on his side. He is presented as terrifying in his power but it is pretty hard to argue the vast majority of what he does are 'bad things' as the universe out-and-out supports them. He worries about how he acts but in the long run Harry's ethics are rarely given a serious push and almost every time they are there's enough plausible deniability that it doesn't really have the same impact. There are a couple of times (the baseball bat scene) where he's presented as terrifying but by and large the book just isn't really willing to stick to it. Butcher writes with too light a touch and it shows. He waggles his hands at Harry being morally ambiguous but the books never really manage to get close to it, although there are some attempts. (The fire in book 3, the baseball bat scene again, mostly stuff early on.) And that's fine. Butcher knows the tone he is going for and he hits it. He wants Harry to exist in a state where if he decided to be evil he'd be terrifying but until then he's basically as good a guy you can be without being Michael. (And even Michael went nuts in Side Jobs.) ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Harry kills a lot of people but by and large his actions are presented in such an ethically right way that he has literal divine angels and ni-flawless paladins on his side. He is presented as terrifying in his power but it is pretty hard to argue the vast majority of what he does are 'bad things' as the universe out-and-out supports them. He worries about how he acts but in the long run Harry's ethics are rarely given a serious push and almost every time they are there's enough plausible deniability that it doesn't really have the same impact. There are a couple of times (the baseball bat scene) where he's presented as terrifying but by and large the book just isn't really willing to stick to it. Butcher writes with too light a touch and it shows. He waggles his hands at Harry being morally ambiguous but the books never really manage to get close to it, although there are some attempts. (The fire in book 3, the baseball bat scene again, mostly stuff early on.) Gotta disagree, straight up in the text we are shown again and again that he does really bad poo poo and people are terrified of him. 5-9 there was the whole plot arc of "was he corrupted by Lash?" that highlighted on his moral ambiguity and his actions sending everyone else running for cover. 7-12 its a recurring thing that he does overtly evil things that scares the crap out of other wizards, like torturing the ghoul in front of all the wardens. Post Changes the reason Chicago is in such a state is that prior to his "death" all goons of the universe were staying clear because his reputation scared them - remember the vampire screaming and running when it saw him in Changes? That Harry is a very evil bastard to everyone else is a core point of multiple arcs of the series. We just get a softer edge to it because we know what he is going through and are assured he isn't all that bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Gotta disagree, straight up in the text we are shown again and again that he does really bad poo poo and people are terrified of him. 5-9 there was the whole plot arc of "was he corrupted by Lash?" that highlighted on his moral ambiguity and his actions sending everyone else running for cover. 7-12 its a recurring thing that he does overtly evil things that scares the crap out of other wizards, like torturing the ghoul in front of all the wardens. Post Changes the reason Chicago is in such a state is that prior to his "death" all goons of the universe were staying clear because his reputation scared them - remember the vampire screaming and running when it saw him in Changes? People are scared of Harry because they have misinformation about him or misunderstand what he is doing. The bulk of his moral nasty actions are conveniently attributable to outside sources like the Winter Mantle, Lash, mental manipulation or whatnot. Harry absolutely has a darkness hidden inside of him and his enemies absolutely end up dead, but not in a way that actually significantly impacts him on a moral level. Harry could be bad news but he isn't. This is stated onscreen by a literal angel. He has an absurd and inflated reputation for a variety of reasons. (And it's somewhat justified too, he has done some absurd stuff.) ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:People are scared of Harry because they have misinformation about him or misunderstand what he is doing. The bulk of his moral nasty actions are conveniently attributable to outside sources like the Winter Mantle, Lash, mental manipulation or whatnot. Harry absolutely has a darkness hidden inside of him and his enemies absolutely end up dead, but not in a way that actually significantly impacts him on a moral level. That the bad stuff can't be attributed to the mantle or Lash and belongs on Harry's choices is a point repeatedly and explicitly made clear. They can't make him, he has free will, he has to choose to do it. I think we are agreeing but talking past each other. That doing these bad things doesn't make him a bad person is explicitly stated as well, yes (though by Michael, not Uriel), but again, that goes back to the series morality being based on the intentional stance. Harry is doing absolutely horrific things, but it isn't for personal gain. Therefore, within the cosmic moral setup crafted from the series, he gets a pass. This is drawing from the stance of morality CS Lewis put in his books (here The Last Battle), where it is perfectly fine to serve evil (Tash) and so long as your intent is to do right by your friends and family you will really be acting in the service of and be saved by good (Aslan). In Butcher's use of it it serves both as an homage to another great fantasy author, likely serves as a reflection of some of his own thoughts on the matter (Lewis being very instrumental in conveying and shaping theological ideas), and serves as a method to soften Harry to the reader.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
Wizards are wonderful. They provoke wonder. Wizards are marvellous. They cause marvels. Wizards are fantastic. They create fantasies. Wizards are glamorous. They project glamour. Wizards are enchanting. They weave enchantment. Wizards are terrific. They beget terror.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Harry's morality is somewhat skewed; he tends to put his family before other people, which leads him to conveniently forget that Thomas is a rapist and murderer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
I think the message from the last Alex book was "Even if you have no choice, even if your back's against the wall, even if you don't get your hands bloody yourself, that doesn't make what you did okay." Because it wasn't. Alex's viewpoint is that he was justified in the things he did because they were the only way he knew to keep himself (and sometimes others) safe. The interesting thing about Alex's world is that people are in fact, willing to stop being his friend when they find out he's a murderer, instead of giving him back pats and telling him he did what he had to do or sticking around to 'keep an eye on him' while giving each other uneasy looks like happens in the Dresden Files when Harry's under suspicion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:That the bad stuff can't be attributed to the mantle or Lash and belongs on Harry's choices is a point repeatedly and explicitly made clear. They can't make him, he has free will, he has to choose to do it. I think that's the thing we disagree on. I don't think (within the confines of the fiction) that Harry is presented as doing horrific things. I think he's doing completely-justified-only-option things for the benefit of others where any blame he takes is incredibly minimized. He is sort of unambiguously a Good Person despite his occasional 'but what if I wasn't?!' fits. He could be utterly terrifying if he wasn't an almost absurdly moral individual and if the universe didn't bend to justify his actions, but maybe he'd make different choices too. (I have problems with this writing but that is neither here nor there.) Silver2195 posted:Harry's morality is somewhat skewed; he tends to put his family before other people, which leads him to conveniently forget that Thomas is a rapist and murderer. I honestly attribute that one to Butcher unfortunately. He seems to take a somewhat skewed view of the "mojo" which makes it wacky fun instead of goddamn rape. Thomas was raping women in Harry's house and it was treated like a comedy thing even by the author.You can kind of write some of that off to Harry's viewpoint but I think in this case, especially with Butcher's other books in mind, that it just isn't the character viewing it that way. (Codex had some similar stuff which was unnerving because it was presented as cute or romantic.) I think he's kinda stepped back on it a little (especially once Thomas went back to the dark side) but the opening of Dead Beat in particular is really weird, even taking Harry's unreliable narratorness into account. ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:' I don't think Thomas was actually using White Court mind control powers when he was living with Harry. I'm referring more to the "offscreen" Thomas. Another example of Harry's family-before-everyone-else attitude is Changes, where he's willing to kill a lot of people (he even considered performing the Darkhallow) to save a daughter he's never met. It makes sense that an orphan like Harry would think that way, but that doesn't make it right. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:I don't think Thomas was actually using White Court mind control powers when he was living with Harry. I'm referring more to the "offscreen" Thomas. Pretty sure that if Mab had turned Harry down he'd have called Laschiel's coin and got help from Nicodemus (Nic had previously offered to help Harry destroy the Red Court when offering him a coin) long before pulling the Darkhallow. In fact, I'm thinking Mirror Mirror Harry will be the one that took up the coin. Either way, "Harry is a horrible person" is meaningless, given how horrible everyone else in that universe is. Some Pinko Commie fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Mar 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:Pretty sure that if Mab had turned Harry down he'd have called Laschiel's coin and got help from Nicodemus (Nic had previously offered to help Harry destroy the Red Court when offering him a coin) long before pulling the Darkhallow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
So at Dysprosium (Eastercon 2015, the 66th British National Science Fiction Convention), Jim Butcher will be giving an interview. They just announced who will be conducting the interview - Charles Stross This promises to be really interesting. Either it will involve them going head to head over like/seething hatred of steampunk, or it is going to be really deep about urban fantasy. Either way it will be interesting as hell
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:That would probably be much worse, at least the Darkhallow would only affect a limited area, Nicodemus has been shooting for global apocalypse. I never said one would be better than the other. The Darkhallow is a Halloween thing and I'm pretty sure Harry wouldn't have had time to do it during Changes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:I never said one would be better than the other. The Darkhallow is a Halloween thing and I'm pretty sure Harry wouldn't have had time to do it during Changes. Well, he could've tried to vary the formula a bit. From what I remember of the analysis we got on the Darkhallow, the same basic formula is a constant of the Dresden universe -- one route to power is to consume the power of others -- the Darkhallow was just, like, a fully optimized and weaponized version.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Pwnstar posted:Wizards are wonderful. They provoke wonder. Where does this come from? I've seen it a few times and haven't managed to work it out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Where does this come from? I've seen it a few times and haven't managed to work it out. Terry Pratchett's _Lords and Ladies_ but in reference to Elves, not Wizards. quote:“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Where does this come from? I've seen it a few times and haven't managed to work it out. I believe it's from Terry Pratchett's Discworld in reference to elves. Edit: Alloy!! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Where does this come from? I've seen it a few times and haven't managed to work it out. I know what series you should read next. Yes, yes I do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
I think Lords and Ladies might be my favourite Discworld book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:I never said one would be better than the other. The Darkhallow is a Halloween thing and I'm pretty sure Harry wouldn't have had time to do it during Changes. True, but if he got to the ziggurat he probably coulda eaten all the stored sacrifical energy or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:I think Lords and Ladies might be my favourite Discworld book. It's up there for me. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Silver2195 posted:I don't think Thomas was actually using White Court mind control powers when he was living with Harry. I'm referring more to the "offscreen" Thomas. He was. The start of Dead Beat has it specifically mentioned. He wasn't doing so intentionally but it kept happening none the less. He wasn't feeding off people though, just... well, having sex. Harry and him even argue over how Thomas has to work on his control of his abilities. It's very "poor Thomas, he can't control himself" but still.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:34
|
|