|
Mortanis posted:Butcher is a masterful troll. Good.
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:18 |
|
|
I just finished London Falling and I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. There were some genuine moments of horror and it got downright grisly at points. Maybe it would have worked better as a self-contained narrative, but I'm still pretty drat excited to learn that there's another book. I appreciated the problem solving skills of the protagonists and how each of them contributed an interesting element to the overall narrative, as well as the case. I will say that the Audible narration is not my favorite. There are weird pauses, some mis-takes, and at first all the characters sound the same.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:
That's not the audiobook's fault. The book's beginning up to the point where they find the cauldron is definitely disjointed and flat. Megazver fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Jul 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I just finished London Falling and I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. There were some genuine moments of horror and it got downright grisly at points. Maybe it would have worked better as a self-contained narrative, but I'm still pretty drat excited to learn that there's another book. I appreciated the problem solving skills of the protagonists and how each of them contributed an interesting element to the overall narrative, as well as the case. I also enjoyed London Falling, I didn't think the second book was anywhere near as good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
The Fool posted:I also enjoyed London Falling, I didn't think the second book was anywhere near as good. I bought it on impulse, but that makes sense. The first book had such a definitive arc for each character, trying to go beyond that would be difficult. Megazver posted:That's not the audiobook's fault. The book's beginning up to the point where they find the cauldron is definitely disjointed and flat. Oh definitely, it has a slow start. I just routinely had difficulty trying to tell who was speaking at first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:Oh definitely, it has a slow start. I just routinely had difficulty trying to tell who was speaking at first. So did I and I read the ebook.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Huh, that's interesting. I will say that Loslie's voice was tremendously creepy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Reading through Annihilation Score and holy poo poo is Mo one horribly unlikeable character. At least the plot seems to be more interesting than Rhesus Chart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:Reading through Annihilation Score and holy poo poo is Mo one horribly unlikeable character. At least the plot seems to be more interesting than Rhesus Chart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Anything I should know before jumping into the Alex Verus series (no spoilers)? I've read all of the Dresden files at least once and the first three Rivers of London and enjoyed them, though Dresden more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
mastajake posted:Anything I should know before jumping into the Alex Verus series (no spoilers)? I've read all of the Dresden files at least once and the first three Rivers of London and enjoyed them, though Dresden more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
mastajake posted:Anything I should know before jumping into the Alex Verus series (no spoilers)? I've read all of the Dresden files at least once and the first three Rivers of London and enjoyed them, though Dresden more. The main thing to remember is that it gets better, and you'll know the best character when you meet her. Spider 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
mastajake posted:Anything I should know before jumping into the Alex Verus series (no spoilers)? I've read all of the Dresden files at least once and the first three Rivers of London and enjoyed them, though Dresden more. It's a good series with an interesting premise. I would say that the actual writing technique is weak in the first book, but he definitely improves. So if you like the story, stick with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
The first book is the weakest book by far; if you can deal with it the others are all vastly improved from it. In a lot of ways, Alex Verus is probably my favorite urban fantasy protagonist. His divination is easily the most interesting ability of all of them and the fact that it lacks direct combat power lends more importance to all his maneuverings and alliances. I also think that he's the most interesting character-wise, as well. To compare it to the Dresden Files, where Dresden is a good guy who has some ends-justify-the-means issues and whose worst personal issues can be at least somewhat attributed to Lash and Winter Knighthood, Verus is an ex-Sithlord type who's a lot more gray and when he does some dark poo poo he doesn't get to pawn it off on the Winter Mantle or a fallen angel and have literal angels descend from the heavens to bro-fist him and tell him that he's Done Right. This makes him a stronger character, imo, even if the series as a whole is weaker.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
SystemLogoff posted:The main thing to remember is that it gets better, and you'll know the best character when you meet her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 09:17
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:Don't, and read M.L. Brennan's Generation V series, Stephen Blackmoore's Eric Carter series, or Elliott James' Pax Arcana series first. Alex Verus is probably the closest thing to Harry Dresden out there right now for people who are jonesing for that kind of story, so I don't think it's fair to put them off it. That said, everyone should check out Generation V it's a hell of a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
mistaya posted:... Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? I just can't understand the romanticization of vampires. They're supposed to be 1-dimensional villains. Their main shtick is draining the life out of others in one of the most horrifyingly visceral ways. I've just never gotten the obsession with them being misunderstood or tragic characters.  But, hey, if you like it, more power to ya, I guess 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? In literary terms, vampires are generally a romanticization of "illicit" sexual impulses. _Interview with a Vampire_ is the gayest book I've ever read, for example. Twilight is popular because the target audience is preteen girls and menopausal housewives who view all their own sexual desires as illicit. Werewolves are the same thing but for rage/passion rather than romance/lust.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:In literary terms, vampires are generally a romanticization of "illicit" sexual impulses. _Interview with a Vampire_ is the gayest book I've ever read, for example. Twilight is popular because the target audience is preteen girls and menopausal housewives who view all their own sexual desires as illicit. Would that make zombies the representation of gluttony?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? If you want to know more: Not only has Fort not transitioned yet into a full vampire, it turns out that his mother fiddled around with his upbringing to try and create a vampire with a conscience. All of the other vampires you see are absolutely terrifying murderous sociopaths who put up with facades of civility that are convincing to various degrees. And vampires are only 1-dimensional bloodthirsty monsters if you're only counting from over 200 years ago. The sexy, charismatic vampire showed up a long time ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? I can understand some of the romanticism of them because they're so deeply tied to sexual imagery, but I do find it utterly and completely impossible to empathize with them when they try to go over how sad and tragic it is they have to murder to extend their immortal lifespans. (See: part of why Thomas is a lovely lovely character.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Dienes posted:Would that make zombies the representation of gluttony?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:
It's even there back then. Polidori's _The Vampyre_ is basically "don't let Byron bang your sister, the novel."
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's even there back then. Polidori's _The Vampyre_ is basically "don't let Byron bang your sister, the novel." To be fair that's very good advice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Come to think of it, the second Pax Arcana book is all kinds of hosed up. Namely, rape. There's a metric ton of rape, and while it's all off page it still becomes a pretty major plot element. And the way that the victims of that rape are treated is pretty loving disgusting. And the hero's badass Valkyrie friend barely shows up. Yeah, book three better be a hell of an improvement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? Fort really isn't angsty though? He's worried because he doesn't want to end up like his family, who are more traditional vampires but there's actual reasons for this and he doesn't like constantly harp on it. 'Vampire urges' are so rarely an issue that it almost feels like it's missing from the series. The vampires in GenV aren't even immortal, they're just longer lived the same way most apex predators generally are longer lived than their prey animals. Vampires are actually really interesting because if you look at their evolution in film/books they mean different things to different generations. The basics are always there but vampires were much more about immortality and power than lust pre-twillight, and it's shifted back towards lust again since then (thanks Stephanie Meyer). Personally I like watching people struggle to remain who they are when faced with inner monsterhood, which is one of the reasons I like Urban Fantasy so much. Vampires/Werewolves are the most obvious versions of this but we see it with a lot of other things too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's even there back then. Polidori's _The Vampyre_ is basically "don't let Byron bang your sister, the novel." Dracula himself is pretty intelligent too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
The vampire is a sentient obligate humanivore; unlike most other creatures/monsters/etc it doesn't get a 'non-evil' choice like "live in the remote wilderness" or "lock the herd up during the full moon". It feeds off people or it dies and, to make matters worse, it used to be human itself. To me, this kind of choice is inherently interesting and vampires are one of my favorite 'monstrous' creature types because they don't really get an option to be anything less than monstrous; a man's got to eat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Khizan posted:The vampire is a sentient obligate humanivore; unlike most other creatures/monsters/etc it doesn't get a 'non-evil' choice like "live in the remote wilderness" or "lock the herd up during the full moon". It feeds off people or it dies and, to make matters worse, it used to be human itself. To me, this kind of choice is inherently interesting and vampires are one of my favorite 'monstrous' creature types because they don't really get an option to be anything less than monstrous; a man's got to eat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
mistaya posted:Vampires are actually really interesting because if you look at their evolution in film/books they mean different things to different generations. The basics are always there but vampires were much more about immortality and power than lust pre-twillight, and it's shifted back towards lust again since then (thanks Stephanie Meyer).
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:No, not really. The original folk stories are about forbidden seduction; Dracula (the book) is pretty drat big on Victorian morals, and that's not mentioning the various Carmillas and Geraldines and who knows what. Vampires got a brief respite because Dracula and Nosferatu showed up on movie screen which was more subject to censorship, but really vampirism is all about sexual domination. Vampires are about as 1:1 of an analogy to the nobility as you can make it (his name is literally Count Dracula) and while sexual dominance is certainly a part of it it's not a coincidence that they're portrayed as leeches on society. Twilight preserves this element of "Vampires = rich people" and instead focuses the story on a girl who's intrigued by and eventually becomes one of the rich.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:No, not really. The original folk stories are about forbidden seduction; Dracula (the book) is pretty drat big on Victorian morals, and that's not mentioning the various Carmillas and Geraldines and who knows what. Vampires got a brief respite because Dracula and Nosferatu showed up on movie screen which was more subject to censorship, but really vampirism is all about sexual domination. Nitpicking a bit, but while Geraldine definitely falls into the "forbidden seduction" category, I'm not sure she can really be called a vampire.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
But how does Varney The Vampire fit into this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Vampires are about as 1:1 of an analogy to the nobility as you can make it (his name is literally Count Dracula) and while sexual dominance is certainly a part of it it's not a coincidence that they're portrayed as leeches on society. You can probably make an argument for class based / marxist readings of relatively late stuff like Dracula, but earlier stuff like polidori's The Vampyre, everyone reading it would also have been a member of the nobility; those characters are all upper crust.for the same reasons that all of Austen's were. Modern authors certainly explore the class based / leech on society thing -- Rhesus Chart for example -- but at root it was sexual first. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Jul 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Wealth and titles probably help with the seduction aspect. I imagine Chester the Serf vampire has a harder go of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Isn't that the one where the main character is an angsty, young vamp who's trying to deal with his urges and lovely family? Yeah, it is. It's badly written, mostly cliched, and I recommend anyone who wants to try it borrow it and read the first bit. You'll know if you can stand it or not right away.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:No, not really. The original folk stories are about forbidden seduction; Dracula (the book) is pretty drat big on Victorian morals, and that's not mentioning the various Carmillas and Geraldines and who knows what. Vampires got a brief respite because Dracula and Nosferatu showed up on movie screen which was more subject to censorship, but really vampirism is all about sexual domination. When I said 'pre-twillight' i was mostly talking about the 80s/90s not like, Stoker. Vampires have never really gone away. There's always been vampires in media, but what part of the vampire myth gets the spotlight varies a lot. Sometimes it's more about social domination and sometimes it's more sexual. It's always about power though, and a temptation/willingness to use that power. That's what's interesting about them to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
The worst part about the Alex Verus series is that the magic system other than what the main characters use is poorly defined. Someone's a fire mage so they can basically sling fire all over the place with no limits which makes it feel really shallow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Generation V hardly romanticises vampires, the whole gimmick is that they are the horrible, mostly sociopathic, cannibalistic monsters wearing a pretty skin suit straight out of any horror movie/novel and probably worse than some - but due to the disturbing way they're 'born', they are sort of incubated as a human and the main character is terrified of becoming a sociopathic cannibal like his family. He was raised by humans as a sort of experiment by his mother to see if he could 'get' humans and pass for them better than the rest, but when he got too attached to his parents as a kid, his sister ate them and dragged him home. It always seems weird that people are so opposed to the idea of vampires having a personality other than mindless cannibal, but a character struggling against turning into a monster is more interesting than just bam instant one dimensional sociopath. torgeaux posted:Yeah, it is. It's badly written, mostly cliched, and I recommend anyone who wants to try it borrow it and read the first bit. You'll know if you can stand it or not right away. I know that everyone has different tastes and all, but people do get a bit snobbish in the Dresden Files thread of all places, which is hardly high literature. Most urban fantasy's gunna be a little trashy and pulpy and cliche and that's the fun of it. Wolpertinger fucked around with this message at 11:20 on Jul 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 17:18 |
|
|
torgeaux posted:Yeah, it is. It's badly written, mostly cliched, and I recommend anyone who wants to try it borrow it and read the first bit. You'll know if you can stand it or not right away. Badly written? Maybe if your reference point is actual literature. Then 99% of fantasy & SF will be badly written. But if it's Dresden, then Generation V is either equal or better than.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 11:20
|
|
