|
wellwhoopdedooo posted:In case you haven’t encountered BotL before, the only reason to reply to him is to wind him up and watch him If you (the general you) decide to go this route, don't loving quote him because it defeats the purpose for those of us that have ignored him.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
I’ll admit, the Gurkish being a bunch of desert religious fanatics spurred on to brutal violence by a false religious leader they call The Prophet (as opposed to the 800 other religious titles that couldn’t have been used that aren’t associated with Mohamed) rubbed me the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
The Gurkish are actually mormons, tia
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
Chuck Buried Treasure posted:I’ll admit, the Gurkish being a bunch of desert religious fanatics spurred on to brutal violence by a false religious leader they call The Prophet (as opposed to the 800 other religious titles that couldn’t have been used that aren’t associated with Mohamed) rubbed me the wrong way. A fantasy novel setting in the equivalent of a Medieval / Renaissance European setting has a conflict that mirrors (or is based loosely on) the Crusades, and this bothers you? Like, we have not gotten the Gurkish side of the story, if anything Joe goes out of the way to show the world is not black and white / right and wrong. If you somehow interpreted these stories as the triumph of Bayaz the good overcoming the evil Kahlul, then IDK what to say. If you think it's about the superior masterrace Union fighting (((Bayaz))) the banker and overcoming Kahlul and the mud people they you should go to a therapist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 04:51
|
|
|
Ornamented Death posted:If you (the general you) decide to go this route, don't loving quote him because it defeats the purpose for those of us that have ignored him. Eh, I’m gonna go ahead and disagree there. It’s always good to stay on top of the latest in specious arguments and redirection, and I gotta hand it to the guy or gal, he/she’s at the bleeding edge. I’ve watched no less than four threads get completely shut down as everybody lost the will to argue with a brick wall and even stopped posting at all, presumably in anticipation of BotL and the coat-tail trolls making any sort of discussion impossible. It’s infuriating, but I gotta reaspct the craft, and you only learn to counter it by observing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 08:08
|
|
|
Why is everyone so bothered by Bravestofthelamp's hot takes? His attitude can be a bit insufferable, but he sometimes makes some good points. His differing opinion doesn't take anything away from you, and overreacting to his criticisms is only going to feed into his "they can't handle the truth" contrarianism.  Chuck Buried Treasure posted:I’ll admit, the Gurkish being a bunch of desert religious fanatics spurred on to brutal violence by a false religious leader they call The Prophet (as opposed to the 800 other religious titles that couldn’t have been used that aren’t associated with Mohamed) rubbed me the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
spandexcajun posted:A fantasy novel setting in the equivalent of a Medieval / Renaissance European setting has a conflict that mirrors (or is based loosely on) the Crusades, and this bothers you? While the material culture of the setting is based on the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, Abercrombie makes no effort to write about people as if they were from the era. Thus all the characters and people are very obviously modern types in historical dress. This is for example why all the "European" characters are atheist or agnostic. Abercrombie is writing about our contemporary conflicts, but imagined with conspiratorial, propagandist character - malevolent Illuminati bankers, demonic Middle Eastern infiltrators (see Shickel). wellwhoopdedooo posted:Eh, I’m gonna go ahead and disagree there. It’s always good to stay on top of the latest in specious arguments and redirection, and I gotta hand it to the guy or gal, he/she’s at the bleeding edge. I’ve watched no less than four threads get completely shut down as everybody lost the will to argue with a brick wall and even stopped posting at all, presumably in anticipation of BotL and the coat-tail trolls making any sort of discussion impossible. 
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 09:35
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:First one has to establish what a "typical fantasy" is. One would assume that it means genre fiction inspired by Tolkien and Dungeons & Dragons, with elves, dwarves, hobbits, and orcs - the "archetypes" of fantasy. This sounds like you are criticizing the characters for being insufficiently cliche. In which case, I agree that the characters in The First Law trilogy were highly original. If you reflect on the first law trilogy a bit more you would realize that the problem with the writing doesn't originate from the characters, but the author's obsession with their characters taking the "wrong path" whenever a choice is presented. Normal Adult Human fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
Normal Adult Human posted:I agree that the characters in The First Law trilogy were highly original. Yeah, you'd think fans would be proud that don't easily slot into archetypes, even if they are not particularly good characters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
I think it's disingenuous to call (with a few exceptions) characters "bad" because their characterization and motivations are usually pretty nuanced and well developed, and the characters themselves grow and evolve over time in unique ways. The problem remains that when presented with a flash point, the flow of the story is jerked around by the author to make sure it's sufficiently Subversive. A good/relatively recent example of this is the denouement of Red Country, where Shanks and Logan finally meet up after Shanks spending several years searching for Logan. They literally shrug at each other and both go home. This sort of makes a weak sense in that Shanks, original shanks from the trilogy, had a grudge against Logan for killing his brother. But in the trilogy, he never acted on it. So he went to Styria and became jaded and cynical and went back to the north to work for black dow because he had nothing better to do. Then he killed black Dow and departed to parts unknown. When he finally catches up to him in Red Country, he is unable to do anything, not because of any characterization, but because it would be really, truly subversive if Logan, the psycho berserker who might be a demon, gets to live into old age and die surrounded by family, while it would also be extremely subversive if Shanks, the new Logan, DIDN'T start a huge cycle of revenge. Normal Adult Human fucked around with this message at 10:07 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
Normal Adult Human posted:A good/relatively recent example of this is the denouement of Red Country, where Shanks and Logan finally meet up after Shanks spending several years searching for Logan. Did you have a different version, or did you mean "Caul Shivers" here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
I don't think he did that to be subversive. He did it because Shivers has seen so much poo poo since his last run in with Logen that it's like, what's the point? At that point he's realized the futility of revenge, especially against someone who has attempted to start over. It's consistent with Shiver's world-weary character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
Ccs posted:I don't think he did that to be subversive. He did it because Shivers has seen so much poo poo since his last run in with Logen that it's like, what's the point? At that point he's realized the futility of revenge, especially against someone who has attempted to start over. It’s consistent with Shivers’ character, but it significantly contrasts with all previous evidence from the book that people can’t change and it’s just one cycle of revenge and fighting after another until somebody sends you back to the mud.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
ulmont posted:It’s consistent with Shivers’ character, but it significantly contrasts with all previous evidence from the book that people can’t change and it’s just one cycle of revenge and fighting after another until somebody sends you back to the mud.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:49
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:It seemed like he was kinda over the whole logen revenge thing even at his darkest at the end of BSC. He was there for calder and still couldn't be bothered. The lessons of BSC - that punishment is brutal but random and poo poo just happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
i'm thankful botl chose my favorite series for his next roast target because it got everybody talking about how rad joe ab's books are
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 06:42
|
|
|
Normal Adult Human posted:I think it's disingenuous to call (with a few exceptions) characters "bad" because their characterization and motivations are usually pretty nuanced and well developed, and the characters themselves grow and evolve over time in unique ways. The problem remains that when presented with a flash point, the flow of the story is jerked around by the author to make sure it's sufficiently Subversive Abercrombie's characters are the exact opposite of nuanced. They tend to be characterized with sentiments gleaned from pulp fiction, which is why they evoke other fictional characters rather than real people. Fans are wrong about them specifically resembling archetypes of genre fantasy, not that they aren't stock. They're just stock processed with extreme sarcasm. Glokta for example is just Tyrion Lannister detached from the context of dynastic struggles and into edgy detective fiction. The reason the universe treats the characters so sadistically is because it fundamentally recognizes them as cheap and juvenile figures, like an idiot god angry at being unable to create anything better. This is also why it treats Glokta so well: he thinks that everything around him is stupid, so he aligns perfectly with the universe's viewpoint. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 08:49
|
|
|
Hmm, yes. I see what you mean. He creates characters that seem familiar because they initially remind us of other characters then develops them in different directions. I seem to recall from my very serious writer courses that there was a name for doing something like that. Edit: my problem was that Bayez didn't remind me of anyone at first, I mean you don't see many people who look like butchers in fantasy and that's the only characterization that Abercrombie gives him. Chef Boyardeez Nuts fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:Hmm, yes. I see what you mean. He creates characters that seem familiar because they initially remind us of other characters then develops them in different directions. You seem still to be operating on the level where you think that "tropes being subverted" is good writing. In reality the characters remain just genre stock no matter how much they "develop". They're cutouts inspired by other genre works rather than, you know, real people. There's no actual person like Sand dan Glokta, for example. There are no witty, sarcastic secret police officers walking around with internal monologues about how corrupt and stupid everyone is. Glokta's a figure of cheap fantasy, a Noir detective combined with Tyrion Lannister. I'm pretty sure Logen Ninefingers was originally a Dungeons & Dragons character. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 16:25 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
How is Glokta simultaneously a character of cheap fantasy and a noir detective/secret police officer? those are not fantasy archetypes. Comparing TFL to ASoif is kind of unfair as, being the dark souls of book reading, every single novel released now is judged against ASoif, largely searching for the evidence George R.R. Martins masterful literary technique which has colloquially come to be referred to as "hey did a POV character die halfway through a book?" no major or POV characters actually die in the Abercrombie novels (except marshal west who dies in the denouement of the third book so that hardly counts.) If you link Glokta to Tyrion just because "he's witty and sarcastic" that would be a tenuous connection as their motivations are dissimilar. Tyrion seeks to be accepted by his family and his father in particular and his behaviour is a childish tantrum masked by his pseudo intellectualism. Glokta wants to not be tortured to death, because he was tortured before, and tortures other people. If Glokta was actually "A Tyrion," Glokta would have much much less internal dialogue, which serves to establish that Gloka is a cowardly but bitter person. Normal Adult Human fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:You seem still to be operating on the level where you think that "tropes being subverted" is good writing. In reality the characters remain just genre stock no matter how much they "develop". They're cutouts inspired by other genre works rather than, you know, real people. Are there real people like Steerpike or Cugel the Clever? Cos I've not met any Machiavellian peasants or Baroque conmen. I don't even mean that as a criticism of Gormenghast or Dying Earth - the settings are unrealistic, and the characters are appropriate for them. Cugel would clash with the stoic cynicism of Abercrombie, and Bayaz's petulance would be out of place amongst Vance's more grandiose villains.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
Normal Adult Human posted:How is Glokta simultaneously a character of cheap fantasy and a noir detective/secret police officer? those are not fantasy archetypes. Fantasy: - a fanciful mental image, typically one on which a person often dwells and which reflects their conscious or unconscious wishes - an idea with no basis in reality - a genre of imaginative fiction involving magic and adventure, especially in a setting other than the real world Normal Adult Human posted:Comparing TFL to ASoif is kind of unfair as, being the dark souls of book reading, every single novel released now is judged against ASoif, largely searching for the evidence George R.R. Martins masterful literary technique which has colloquially come to be referred to as "hey did a POV character die halfway through a book?" no major or POV characters actually die in the Abercrombie novels (except marshal west who dies in the denouement of the third book so that hardly counts.) Actually it's because both are medieval fantasy series about seemingly mundane geopolitical conflicts and intrigues that become influenced by supernatural elements, portrayed from multiple POVs that cover several areas of conflict, and both approach this with a highly cynical and disillusioned philosophy. Also, they're both crap.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
What made you do such a 180 in the past year and a half of so?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:What made you do such a 180 in the past year and a half of so? I found God
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
Which one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
You will burn e: Strom Cuzewon posted:Are there real people like Steerpike or Cugel the Clever? Cos I've not met any Machiavellian peasants or Baroque conmen. There are deff real people like Steerpike and Cugel the Clever. Also all Vance's villain are super petty and petulant, that's why they're his characters. Bayaz is watered-down Vance. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Responding to a character critique with a genre critique doesn't make sense! You are arguing in bad faith! Die!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Hypocrite that you are, you do not recognize that characters are part of the holistic whole of genre. One cannot examine a character without examining the context in which they appear. Will you fight? Or will you perish like a dog?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
"Let me go into this thread and tell everyone how wrong they are. That will be productive."
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
Beastie posted:"Let me go into this thread and tell everyone how wrong they are. That will be productive." 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Chuck Buried Treasure posted:I’ll admit, the Gurkish being a bunch of desert religious fanatics spurred on to brutal violence by a false religious leader they call The Prophet (as opposed to the 800 other religious titles that couldn’t have been used that aren’t associated with Mohamed) rubbed me the wrong way. They were spurred on by the Union executing two successive ambassadors. The second guy wasn't religious at all and was offended at the prospect that he served Khalul. The emporer offered the Union a face-saving peace. Khalul was advocating war with the Union and the Hundred Words were capeable of handling Bayaz until he pulled a fantasy nuke out of his rear end. As badly as they wanted thier shot at the Magus, they needed the Emporer's okay. So Uthman-ul-Dosht appears to have more autonomy in Khalul's realm than the King of the Union does under Bayaz. I, a simpleton, look forward to learning about how the fantasy Caliphate is not as it described by it's antagonists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
What the hell is wrong with cutout genre characters that aren't like real people, anyway? There's a reason there's so many of them around, and have been forever, and it's because people find certain larger-than-life types in stories compelling. Yes, ultimately Glokta is a pile of archetypes mashed together, with maybe some novel combinations and flourishes from the author. However, he works because he's just well-written, with a good balance between horrible, witty and pitiable. Abercrombie is not as clever or innovative as some people make him out to be, but he is an excellent craftsman and makes the normally insufferable "cynical, bitter and sarcastic" character fun to read. Same goes for the other books. The Heroes is an absolutely by the numbers war story, more an homage to the genre than any attempt to push it forward. It's still loving excellent simply because Abercrombie writes fantastic action scenes and the characters' internal monologue is always entertaining, with a distinctive voice, internally consistent motivations and entirely plausible human concerns. Except in obviously exaggerated caricature, but that's a perfectly legitimate form of expression.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:What the hell is wrong with cutout genre characters that aren't like real people, anyway? There's a reason there's so many of them around, and have been forever, and it's because people find certain larger-than-life types in stories compelling. It isn't. Some random is working off his/her grad school frustrations by  -vomiting out what boils down to "your subjective opinion is objectively wrong."I'm sorry they hurt you, Bravestofthelams.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
Though this is the most posts I've seen for years in this thread, usually pretty dead so that's a positive. Also can't wait for the next Law trilogy
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 02:26
|
|
|
Destro posted:Though this is the most posts I've seen for years in this thread, usually pretty dead so that's a positive. Also can't wait for the next Law trilogy yeah fuckin hyped
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:What the hell is wrong with cutout genre characters that aren't like real people, anyway? There's a reason there's so many of them around, and have been forever, and it's because people find certain larger-than-life types in stories compelling. We've entered the nihilistic "it doesn't matter if it's well written or not" phase. Guildencrantz posted:Yes, ultimately Glokta is a pile of archetypes mashed together, with maybe some novel combinations and flourishes from the author. However, he works because he's just well-written, with a good balance between horrible, witty and pitiable. Abercrombie is not as clever or innovative as some people make him out to be, but he is an excellent craftsman and makes the normally insufferable "cynical, bitter and sarcastic" character fun to read. Their internal monologues are absolute crap. Read Man WIthout Qualities or something for actual hilarious internal monologue instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 08:13
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:We've entered the nihilistic "it doesn't matter if it's well written or not" phase. I'm saying it is in fact well written, and whether or not the characters are archetypes (or whether it's original or derivative in other respects) is completely orthogonal to that. Abercrombie's prose, as in the nuts-and-bolts craftsmanship of the choice of words and flow of the sentences, is very good. Of course you're going to respond with "no it isn't" but that's a matter of taste. And yes of course it doesn't stand up to masterpieces of literary fiction, it's a grimdark adventure novel. All you're doing is pointing at genre fiction, y'know, entertainment, and going "this is poo poo because it doesn't aim to comment on the zeitgeist and advance the literary arts". Basically, if you'll excuse the poor analogy, the equivalent of looking at a good pizza and saying "well this is a completely terrible salad". No worries, I did the same thing as a first year English Lit student, everyone goes through that phase before they realize they're being a pretentious twat and it's OK to read some books for intellectual stimulation and others to have a good time turning pages and finding out what happens next 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 08:44
|
|
|
The First Law trilogy is not that much about subverting expectations. It's a fantasy novel that tries to work with some of the most well-known character archetypes and show how well-adjusted people would they be if their authors didn't omit their flaws whenever they make them look bad. The angry berserker doesn't conveniently remember himself when he's about to murder someone innocent, the vengeance-obsessed warrior treats her companions like poo poo because she doesn't care about anything, the immortal mage shaping the fate of entire nations doesn't have any empathy for the "lesser" people. It may not be very deep and profound, but it doesn't have to be. It's supposed to be entertaining and Abercrombie pulls this off pretty well. One more subverted expectation that appears in the trilogy is of characters learning deep life lessons. They show up as flawed people in the first book, appear to have learned a lot in the second one, then get back to their old selves because their environment forces them to. Logen turns into his mean persona as soon as he meets other Northmen, Ferro wants to have nothing to do with her friends to get back to killing Gurkish soldiers, Jezal becomes a spoiled coward again when he returns as a hero and everyone pampers him even more. As for Glokta, he tries to be something more than a crippled torturer. Every time he does something good, he gets punished for that - the city he tries to defend is abandoned by it's authorities, the prisoner he gets out turns out to be an Eater, Carlot dan Eider betrays him. Near the end he fully accepts who he is, works strictly within the limits set by his society - and is the only character in the book except Bayaz that doesn't end up unhappy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 08:45
|
|
|
That's incredibly boring.Guildencrantz posted:I'm saying it is in fact well written Hmmm..... seems a bit contradictory. Abercrombie's prose is completely banal genre prose flavoured by the usual unbearable internal monologues, a la Ender's Game or ASOIAF. quote:He forced himself to be still. To breathe long and slow. He made his mind move off the pain and on to other things. Like Bayaz, and his failed quest for this Seed. After all, his Eminence is waiting, and is not known for his patience. He stretched his neck out to either side and felt the bones clicking between his twisted shoulder-blades. He pressed his tongue into his gums and shuffled away from the steps, into the cool darkness of the stacks. Even when he manages some halfway decent sarcasm, he dilutes it, in this case with horribly unimaginative dialogue: quote:"poo poo!" he barked. "Entirely poo poo!" The scant satisfaction of victory was already fast melting, like an unseasonable flurry of snow on a warm day, before the crushing disappointment, wounding betrayal and simple inconvenience of his new, assistant-less, employer-less situation. For Day's final words had left him in no doubt that Murcatto was to blame. That after all his thankless, selfless toil on her behalf she had plotted his death. Why had he not anticipated this development? How could he not have expected it, after all the painful reverses he had suffered in his life? He was simply too soft a personage for this harsh land, this unforgiving epoch. Too trusting and too comradely for his own good. He was prone to see the world in the rosy tones of his own benevolence, cursed always to expect the best from people. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 08:59 on Jun 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 08:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 13:25 |
|
|
or maybe it's good dialogue? i like it. pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 09:46
|
|