|
anilEhilated posted:Anna Anna Anna Anne. I mean, you even have a capital E in your username, how could you forget?
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:Anne.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Female characters in Verus tend to get pretty beat up. Partly it's because a lot of the cast is female and it's a violent series, but, like, I think the only Verus ally who *hasn't* been badly injured and then had Alex rescue them, at this point, is Variam. And I'm counting Arachne. Sonder maybe. Now that I think about it there is a wide pattern of having to 'rescue' women, even the Deleo thing. At least it's not Dresden I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:Sonder maybe. I guess I don't really think about it because in Verus, most ( all? ) of the women are strong ( but not perfect ) characters that have their own goals and motives and are often in conflict with Verus, whereas most of the women on Team Dresden are significantly weaker than him, don't really... exist, outside of Dresden's sphere of influence, and they're all crones or described in pin-up paragraphs. I'm trying to think of moments in Dresden where one of the main characters on Harry's side had a significant conflict with him that wasn't due to a trick or a misunderstanding which didn't end with them doing what Harry wanted anyways, or realizing Harry was right. There's always some degree of hinting they don't trust Dresden, or that they might do something, but it never really seems to materialize.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
One of the key differences between Verus and Dresden is the scope of their adversaries. Verus almost exclusively fights against people and organizations of people who have their own people agendas. Very few are treated as Evil, capital E, and most are, at worst, morally questionable. Dresden fights monsters. Everyone on his side fights monsters with him. There’s little question of this is right or not. See monster, smash monster, sorry about the building. Everyone against him is a monster or, at best, a lesser monster fighting a bigger one, which Dresden excuses in the name of the big picture. In the former, Verus’ world, there is lots of room for shades of grey and people working at cross purposes. In Dresden, you are either on board with fighting monsters, or you’re on the side of the monsters, in which case god help you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:One of the key differences between Verus and Dresden is the scope of their adversaries. I'm going to have to disagree. This ain't no Dracula; Dresden reaches for a lot of grey, but never really captures it quite as well as Verus. A lot of Dresden's characters aim at being morally grey. Thomas, Kincaid, Bob, Binder, Morgan, Marcone, Molly, McCoy, a character literally named Grey, the Grey Council, and basically all of the Fae... and while a lot of these characters aren't strictly human and are kind of outside human morality, it shows the series reaching for ambiguity, something that's also shown in the villains. Nicodemus for sure does bad things, but the series repeatedly hints at the reason behind it being one of those "greater good" things. Ditto Cowl. Ditto Kumori. Ditto Mab. Marcone. There are people who are for sure bad and do nothing but bad, but it tries to play with and blur the lines, with Harry included. Most of the consequences that Harry suffers as a result of his choices ultimately impact other characters much more then Harry, but in a way that makes you sympathetic toward Harry. Harry tries to weasel out of the bargain with his grandmother, using the holy sword. Harry's failing, but Michael suffers. Harry uses the power of a fallen angel, but his subconscious, not him, is the one that makes that decision. Harry ultimately caves and uses Lash's power, but never suffers or sacrifices anything for it, Lash does. Harry gets Michael to compromise his values as a knight, and Michael is crippled as a result, but you're supposed to feel sorry for Harry. Harry literally kills himself out of selfishness and fucks over everyone, but you're supposed to feel sorry for Harry. Someone is mind controlled and forced to be Harry's girlfriend against their will, but you're supposed to feel sorry for Harry. The series routinely calls into question Harry's motives and whether the ends justify the means, but it does so in kind of unrewarding ways. The vast majority of the characters have good reason for validating Harry's actions, either because their perspective is compromised because he's their friend, because they only have the picture Harry shows him, or they aim to get something out of him... but it also undermines a lot of the conflict the series tries to create. I enjoy the series for what it is, and I'm eagerly ( angrily  ) waiting for Peace Talks, but oh boy do I dislike this part of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:I'm going to have to disagree. This ain't no Dracula; Dresden reaches for a lot of grey, but never really captures it quite as well as Verus. I get what you're saying, but frankly: Dresden only pays lip service to shades of grey. The white gets a bit dingy, and the black fades a bit..but ultimately it's a series about Good vs Evil. Verus is one where Good and Evil are subjective, and treated as such at nearly all points. There are exceptions to both, but they are just that: exceptions. There is absolutely a fundamental difference in the focus of the two series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:I guess I don't really think about it because in Verus, most ( all? ) of the women are strong ( but not perfect ) characters that have their own goals and motives and are often in conflict with Verus, whereas most of the women on Team Dresden are significantly weaker than him, don't really... exist, outside of Dresden's sphere of influence, and they're all crones or described in pin-up paragraphs. Murphy arrests Dresden in the first book, and is entirely justified in doing so. She even told him she was going to arrest him if he kept doing that and he kept doing it anyways. I forget who, but maybe Murphy again, calls Dresden out on randomly and needlessly destroying property in one of the later books after he blows up a street lamp because he was frustrated. Dresden agrees with her that she's right and apologizes. There's an entire book and several side stories that examine what Dresden's allies do when he's not around. Dresden gives props to the werewolves, men and women, and is framed as an idiot for not trusting them more and for trying to keep them from helping. Thomas Raith frequently points out that Harry's plans are terrible - often just before the plan goes horribly horribly wrong and Dresden gets his rear end kicked. Notably this happens in Grave Peril, the same book that introduces Thomas Raith. Both Michael and Father Forthill are consistently presented as better men than Harry. The same can be said for most of the Knights of the Sword. There's no denying that Butcher sexualizes almost every woman in his books, but he also makes them at least as fully rounded as their male counterparts. They stand on their own feet (as much as any non-wizard can) and not infrequently correctly call Harry out on his bullshit. LLSix fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jul 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Murphy arrests Dresden in the first book, and is entirely justified in doing so. She even told him she was going to arrest him if he kept doing that and he kept doing it anyways. No. Murphy arresting Harry for holding out on her (and breaking his tooth doing so #ACAB) was bullshit. Harry should have been, sure, Murphy arrest me and get me a lawyer and you can explain that I am a wizard and might have done the heart explosion thing on the hit man and hooker using magic to the nice DA oh enjoy your mandatory “vacation” and psych eval. Also, I’m suing the department for excessive force and you’ll settle or it’ll get out that one of your LTs are arresting “wizards” for doing “black magic” and breaking their faces while doing so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Murphy did nothing wrong. (But unironically)
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
navyjack posted:No. Murphy arresting Harry for holding out on her (and breaking his tooth doing so #ACAB) was bullshit. Harry should have been, sure, Murphy arrest me and get me a lawyer and you can explain that I am a wizard and might have done the heart explosion thing on the hit man and hooker using magic to the nice DA oh enjoy your mandatory “vacation” and psych eval. wasnt this chicago in like, what, 90s? he'd have ended up in homan square and come out unable to speak without a stutter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think UF now is kinda where, say, Detective Fiction was in the 1890's when Doyle first started writing Sherlock Holmes. There were a few precursors (Poe / Glen Cook), but Butcher came along and like Doyle was the first person to put together 90% of the formula for the genre. It being the 21st century instead of the 19th, things develop a little faster, and so some other authors like Aaronovitch and Jacka are already putting the remaining 10% together before Butcher has even had a chance to finish, but I feel he still deserves a fair bit of credit for at least taking UF out of the romance-novel-with-sexy-vampires ghetto. Forgive me for quoting such an old rear end post but how does this square with the likes of Charles de Lint, Terri Windling, John Crowley, Emma Bull, etc. who were writing a fully formed version of what I consider "urban fantasy" way back in the 80s? It's different from Dresden or sexy vampires and werewolves novels but it's still UF Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Jul 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Forgive me for quoting such an old rear end post but how does this square with the likes of Charles de Lint, John Crowley and Emma Bull, who were writing a fully formed version of what I consider "urban fantasy" way back in the 80s? It's different from Dresden or sexy vampires and werewolves novels but it's still UF
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:Same way Doyle squared with Poe and Wilkie Collins. Butcher's work is just too different and inferior from the authors I mention to make this a fair or apt comparison. In some ways he hijacked the genre more than he innovated it Lightning Lord fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Jul 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Forgive me for quoting such an old rear end post but how does this square with the likes of Charles de Lint, Terri Windling, John Crowley, Emma Bull, etc. who were writing a fully formed version of what I consider "urban fantasy" way back in the 80s? It's different from Dresden or sexy vampires and werewolves novels but it's still UF It wasn't a separate marketing genre. Dresden got big enough that (like Sherlock Holmes) suddenly the genre exploded as a genre. There were plenty of precursors but none of them were big enough successes for a separate genre to crystallize. I mean, hell, Tim Powers' Declare is in every single way a better novel than anything Butcher's ever written. But it isn't in airport bookstores.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
I read Emma bulls novel and Dresden fires is better imho. It revised the formula and does more with it, but it is a series being compared to a novel.Lightning Lord posted:Butcher's work is just too different and inferior from the authors I mention to make this a fair or apt comparison. In some ways he hijacked the genre more than he innovated it I like the Dresden files and find it odd people like to poo poo on the author a lot. Exmond fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Jul 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean, hell, Tim Powers' Declare is in every single way a better novel than anything Butcher's ever written. But it isn't in airport bookstores. poo poo, I should read it again
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Murphy arrests Dresden in the first book, and is entirely justified in doing so. She even told him she was going to arrest him if he kept doing that and he kept doing it anyways. Murphy comes off as seriously grating and not very well portrayed in the first few books, especially the second. Now I admit it has been a while since I read the first book, so I'll use the second as an example here. In Fool Moon, Dresden and Murphy come into conflict, but almost immediately afterwards, Harry is validated and someone else ( Murphy's partner, randos ) suffer as a result. ( I actually like that this causes Harry to get a little introspective and I like the conflict between him and Murphy, and while it could have been better, it's his second book.) Dresden does lose his temper and blow up a sidewalk, but it turns out that it's Lash and his subconscious are screwing around. This also invalidates the scene where he gave into blood lust to batter the xenomorph at Splattercon and got someone killed ( maybe ), and possibly the ghoul torture/execution scene. I forget where that falls on the timeline. When Dresden kills himself so that he doesn't become a monster, forcing Molly to pull the trigger on her teacher by proxy, that's an interesting character moment which is... completely invalidated, because it isn't his fault. Someone whispered in his ear. On the subject of his allies, his plans... eh. If you have a fifteen book series and I need to examine side-stories to make main characters become more three-dimensional, that's just... you not being good at fleshing out your characters. While allies might express misgivings about Dresden or his plans, they... typically go along with them anyways, and it's only in the most recent books that they start getting more independent and doubtful. Butters spies on Harry. Murphy tells Harry to pound sand over the swords. Both of these things are cool and good except Butters almost immediately gets killed and Harry rescues him, showing that he was right, and Murphy gets beat down and breaks a sword. By the end of Skin Game, the remaining sword not carried by a knight is back in Harry's hands. Michael and Forthill are presented as better men, but, and I say this as someone who likes Michael- Michael isn't just good. Michael is flawless. Think up a fault that doesn't start with "he's too-". He's too honorable. He's too hard-working. And I'm going to have to say that... ehhhh, no. I like the series, but his many of his female characters do not stand on their own feet very well. They tend to be overly emotional, or manipulative, and this is something that pops up in his other books, too. I don't think he does it intentionally, but it can get super cringey sometimes. Exmond posted:I like the Dresden files and find it odd people like to poo poo on the author a lot. I enjoy the books, and Jim has a lot of strong points as an author. I just also enjoy picking apart everything that I read. NerdyMcNerdNerd fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Jul 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 05:32
|
|
|
Exmond posted:I like the Dresden files and find it odd people like to poo poo on the author a lot. The dude is basically the gooniest fucker alive. Of course we poo poo on him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 13:04
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:The dude is basically the gooniest fucker alive. Of course we poo poo on him. Specifically, we poo poo on him because he's the gooniest fucker alive and is very successful and his work is read by millions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Specifically, we poo poo on him because he's the gooniest fucker alive and is very successful and his work is read by millions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Murphy comes off as seriously grating and not very well portrayed in the first few books, especially the second. Now I admit it has been a while since I read the first book, so I'll use the second as an example here. In Fool Moon, Dresden and Murphy come into conflict, but almost immediately afterwards, Harry is validated and someone else ( Murphy's partner, randos ) suffer as a result. Yep, Murphy definitely shouldn't have arrested him that time, but only because she doesn't have the firepower to win without Harry. There's nothing to indicate that she was wrong about Harry loving her over, or that she was wrong that the way he was behaving was going to get people killed. While Harry is somewhat justified in that he's still the only one with the oomph to actually solve the problem (an ongoing justification for not putting an obvious loose cannon somewhere he'll stop blowing stuff up) Murphy's position is justified much more completely by Harry admitting he was wrong and starting to do exactly what Murphy asked him to do in the first place. The first half-dozen books are a lot weaker than post Dead Beat, so everyone is more grating. Which is a problem Butcher has admitted publicly and worked to correct. NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Dresden does lose his temper and blow up a sidewalk, but it turns out that it's Lash and his subconscious are screwing around. This also invalidates the scene where he gave into blood lust to batter the xenomorph at Splattercon and got someone killed ( maybe ), and possibly the ghoul torture/execution scene. I forget where that falls on the timeline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
Thing is at that early point of the books, Murphy absolutely was stubborn enough to walk into a vampire's den and try making arrests so Harry is justified in keeping things close to his chest. It's only later that they get to the point where he can tell her something is too big or too dangerous to be handled within the law, and she accepts it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Thing is at that early point of the books, Murphy absolutely was stubborn enough to walk into a vampire's den and try making arrests so Harry is justified in keeping things close to his chest. It's only later that they get to the point where he can tell her something is too big or too dangerous to be handled within the law, and she accepts it. I'm aware that early Harry thought so, but he was pretty obviously wrong. Just like he was wrong about Amoracchius being just a sword in his hands. Or many, many, many other things. The very first time we get to see Harry bring Murphy fully on-board is in Grave Peril. Murphy doesn't try to arrest the Renfields, and instead deals with them the way her advisors on magic assure her is the only possible approach. Admittedly, that's the third book, so let's look at Murphy's introduction in Storm Front. Harry implies that together they've dealt with "vampire attacks, troll maraudings, and faery abductions" successfully. Off-screen as it were. Hmm, guess Murphy isn't too stubborn to deal with magic stuff appropriately. All things considered, I think Butcher does a better than average job of both showing that Harry is wrong to keep secrets the way he does and that the women in his story are just as competent as the men. Which isn't to say the sexualized descriptions of essentially every adult woman in his writing isn't skeevy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
I want to like the Dresden Files, but mostly I just remember that Murphy had to shimmy around without her pants on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
I think the problem most people have with Dresden Files is that they think Harry is unfallible. It's an aspect of the first person narrative. It's hard to think the person inside whose mind you are is wrong but I think that's exactly what Butcher is on about. Harry is dumb at times. Harry is fallible at times. But you unconsciously think Harry is Jim Butcher but that is not the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
General Emergency posted:I think the problem most people have with Dresden Files is that they think Harry is unfallible. It's an aspect of the first person narrative. It's hard to think the person inside whose mind you are is wrong but I think that's exactly what Butcher is on about. Harry is dumb at times. Harry is fallible at times. But you unconsciously think Harry is Jim Butcher but that is not the case. It helps a lot to listen to interviews with Butcher because he's very clear that Harry is an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
General Emergency posted:I think the problem most people have with Dresden Files is that they think Harry is unfallible. It's an aspect of the first person narrative. It's hard to think the person inside whose mind you are is wrong but I think that's exactly what Butcher is on about. Harry is dumb at times. Harry is fallible at times. But you unconsciously think Harry is Jim Butcher but that is not the case. Yeah, I mean there are absolutely a lot of legitimate criticisms of both Butcher's writing and of Harry as a character, but the narrative is very aware of (some of) his flaws, and (some of) those flaws do actively cause him trouble that he could avoid if he weren't such a dumbass about some things. The way I think I've summed it up in the past is that Harry, the character, has some baggage that Jim, the writer, is aware of, but Jim, the writer, also has a bit of baggage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
(It also puts a LOT in perspective if you start thinking of Harry as Basically Spider-Man, But With Magic.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
docbeard posted:(It also puts a LOT in perspective if you start thinking of Harry as Basically Spider-Man, But With Magic.) Which is really evident if you read the Spider-Man novel Butcher wrote. Zore fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Jul 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
I've found it clicks home with some people when they read some of the short stories that are from a different character's POV; especially when that character talks about Harry
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
jivjov posted:I've found it clicks home with some people when they read some of the short stories that are from a different character's POV; especially when that character talks about Harry I might try that. The only one I read was one of Molly's, which talks about (sigh) The Rack and spends it all wondering What Would Harry Do? (Blast harder.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:I might try that. The only one I read was one of Molly's, which talks about (sigh) The Rack and spends it all wondering What Would Harry Do? (Blast harder.) The Murphy POV one set right after Changes is good for this, maybe even the Thomas/Oblivion War one
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
I do think while Butcher has problems that pop up in all his series, it is fair to say that a lot of Harry's poo poo is on Harry. (Or retroactively on Harry as Butcher adjusts his own views.) He's wrong pretty frequently and Butcher even plays around with that for certain books. He probably gets to be 'right' about some things a bit too often but more often than not if Butcher has someone who is one of Harry's allies being a jerk to Harry it is perfectly valid from that person's perspective and any disagreement we have is because of Harry's viewpoint. (And as seen when Mab jacked his memories that can be fallible.) I also do think it can be a bit hard to tell where Harry's flaws begin and Butcher's writing flaws end from time to time. It's pretty legitimately hard to tell, for example, how we're supposed to feel about Thomas. Harry gives him infinite passes and so do most of Harry's allies but Butcher has made it clear he raped and murdered children and I'm not sure if we're expected to empathize with him because ~sad vampire~ or if it's just supposed to be Harry's family poo poo giving him trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:I might try that. The only one I read was one of Molly's, which talks about (sigh) The Rack and spends it all wondering What Would Harry Do? (Blast harder.) Wondering WWHD is super in character for Molly though?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Decius posted:Wondering WWHD is super in character for Molly though? Also boring to read about and with even dumber attempts at humor than usual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
I haven't finished the Molly story, but I actually enjoyed the new perspective and the voice of the character and the narrator. Shame about all the sex stuff in the story though. It only detracts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
General Emergency posted:I think the problem most people have with Dresden Files is that they think Harry is unfallible. It's an aspect of the first person narrative. It's hard to think the person inside whose mind you are is wrong but I think that's exactly what Butcher is on about. Harry is dumb at times. Harry is fallible at times. But you unconsciously think Harry is Jim Butcher but that is not the case. Imho when an author decides to make their hero a misogynist, racist homophobe you're allowed to question the motivation of the author.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 09:46
|
|
|
BabyFur Denny posted:Imho when an author decides to make their hero a misogynist, racist homophobe 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
BabyFur Denny posted:Imho when an author decides to make their hero a misogynist, racist homophobe you're allowed to question the motivation of the author. The gently caress? Writing a flawed character makes you have the flaws of that character? I think you need to read more broadly than just loving genre fiction. Or do you think Lolita makes Nabokov a pedophile? What do you think his "motivation" is? gently caress. Get a grip.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2018 22:31
|
|