|
Zeitgueist posted:Re: Malazan-chat. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to Abercrombie fans. There's crossover, but they're different styles. Abercrombie is about the characters, Erickson is about the setting. Having read everything by both, I very much prefer Erickson. Erickson have better and more memorable characters than Abercrombie, with the possible exception of Glokta. Reading Abercrombie is like reading the book version of a comic, which is not a bad thing.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
People who defend Malazan remind me of this girl I dated who put ketchup on her eggs-- She was a nice person and reasonably intelligent, but never in a million years would I let her pick where we were going to eat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:People who defend Malazan remind me of this girl I dated who put ketchup on her eggs-- What? You don't put ketchup on your eggs? Weirdo. (Unless you mean boiled eggs or like poached eggs)
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 14:39
|
|
|
For me, high fantasy books are immensely hard to get to after Abercrombie and say, ASOIAF. I like simple names, simple history and simple presentations. Maybe I'm simple.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:For me, high fantasy books are immensely hard to get to after Abercrombie and say, ASOIAF. I like simple names, simple history and simple presentations. Maybe I'm simple. Simple books for simple people, read Abercrombie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 10:09
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Simple books for simple people, read Abercrombie. Well... Read Paolini.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 13:11
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Re: Malazan-chat. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to Abercrombie fans. There's crossover, but they're different styles. Abercrombie is about the characters, Erickson is about the setting. I wouldn't recommend Malazan to anybody, even though I happen to enjoy it quite a bit despite its flaws. It's just not accessible to anyone beyond the most goony (or secretly goony) of us, which is also why I think its thread has the most weirdos of any fantasy series thread outside of ASOIAF. I would recommend GRRM, Abercrombie, Sanderson, and a couple authors with incomplete series/arcs (Rothfuss, Scott Lynch and Anthony Ryan) and pretty much require someone to finish all of those before subjecting someone to the labyrinth of Malazan. But most people I talk to got into fantasy through Game of Thrones or Wheel of Time, anyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
It's just a book series. Not like you need a college degree to get through it or anything. I'd recommend people read Malazan because there are a lot of awesome characters doing unexpected and unpredictable things in a vast, old and mysterious world. Half the fun is finding new things about the story out just as the characters themselves encounter them. They're meaty books but then again so is almost everything else in fantasy. It's a great series and fans of fantasy owe it to themselves to check it out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 09:03
|
|
|
Affi posted:What? You don't put ketchup on your eggs? Weirdo. (Unless you mean boiled eggs or like poached eggs) Ketchup is gross -- period. Read the first 4 Malazan books 4 or so years back and became burned out by the 5th. I can recall maybe two characters (Karsa and Kruppe). Whereas Abercrombie has created a slew of unforgettable character that I'm not ever like to forget. Space Pussy fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Mar 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:People who defend Malazan remind me of this girl I dated who put ketchup on her eggs-- Heh. Space Pussy posted:Read the first 4 Malazan books 4 or so years back and became burned out by the 5th. I can recall maybe two characters (Karsa and Kruppe). Whereas Abercrombie has created a slew of unforgettable character that I'm not ever like to forget. Abercrombie has a few really hard to forget characters to me: Ninefingers, Shivers, Gorst, Bayaz, Monza. They have really well developed arcs, he spends a lot more time on the individual characters, they're relentlessly interesting. He's also got some really boring characters like Glokta who just feels like a mishmash of cliches, but the ratio of good to bad characters is pretty good. I think Erikson has a huge slew of awesome characters (Shadowthrone, Iskaral Pust, Kruppe, all the Boles, Karsa, Bauchelain and Korbal Broach, Tehol and Bugg, Hellian, Icarium, Ublala Pung, Envy and Spite, etc) but most of them don't get as much time dedicated to them as one of Abercrombie's characters does. Overall the good to boring character ratio is probably a little worse with Erikson because he just has such a huge mass of disposable characters. Both authors own, but they're doing such different things that it's not fair to compare them too closely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 12:23
|
|
|
02-6611-0142-1 posted:Abercrombie has a few really hard to forget characters to me: Ninefingers, Shivers, Gorst, Bayaz, Monza. They have really well developed arcs, he spends a lot more time on the individual characters, they're relentlessly interesting. He's also got some really boring characters like Glokta who just feels like a mishmash of cliches, but the ratio of good to bad characters is pretty good. I think Erikson has a huge slew of awesome characters (Shadowthrone, Iskaral Pust, Kruppe, all the Boles, Karsa, Bauchelain and Korbal Broach, Tehol and Bugg, Hellian, Icarium, Ublala Pung, Envy and Spite, etc) but most of them don't get as much time dedicated to them as one of Abercrombie's characters does. Overall the good to boring character ratio is probably a little worse with Erikson because he just has such a huge mass of disposable characters. Both authors own, but they're doing such different things that it's not fair to compare them too closely. So far as I'm concerned, your opinion on Glokta invalidates the rest of that post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
Braking Gnus posted:So far as I'm concerned, your opinion on Glokta invalidates the rest of that post. The worst thing about Before They Are Hanged was all those lovely chapters without Glokta. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
Tried reading Malazan, bored the gently caress out of me. I can get how people like it, but I don't really like having to read multiple one-thousand page books just to understand the setting. Ketchup rocks though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
TheWorldIsSquare posted:Tried reading Malazan, bored the gently caress out of me. I can get how people like it, but I don't really like having to read multiple one-thousand page books just to understand the setting. Ketchup rocks though. I've only read Gardens of the Moon and am well aware of the supposed inferiority when compared with other Malazan books but I really didn't like it at all. I especially hated Kruppe, who I later learned was some sort of fan favourite, and resolved not to read any of the rest of the books. And I'm all but certain that I've made this exact post before.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Characters a lot more important to me than setting. People have told me that Malazan has really good characters but... I honestly don't really believe them. Up to the third book, where I stopped, I cared about literally none of the characters. Not even things that were supposed to tear at the heartstrings like the Crows or whatever they were called getting murdered at the end of the second book did much for me. I think it's because the dialogue feels... fake. It's like I'm reading characters in a fantasy novel talk to each other, while in Abercombie works and ASOIAF to a lesser extent it feels like natural conversation. I even didn't like the setting much either, there were way too many Unexplained Fantasy Words. Gods actively walking around on earth and loving poo poo up is pretty cool though.
Sex Beef 2.0 fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Mar 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
Braking Gnus posted:So far as I'm concerned, your opinion on Glokta invalidates the rest of that post. John Charity Spring posted:I've only read Gardens of the Moon and am well aware of the supposed inferiority when compared with other Malazan books but I really didn't like it at all. I especially hated Kruppe, who I later learned was some sort of fan favourite, and resolved not to read any of the rest of the books. coyo7e fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Mar 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
I understand why some people are crazy about Malazan. I work on a train and I'm constantly stuck with another person in the cab for hours and hours at a time, and the subject of books always comes up eventually. Train workers are usually pretty well read because of the inherent boredom of the occupation. This guy I worked with told me he loved fantasy. So I asked him what he read and he listed off the series in the order he'd read them. 1. Dragonlance 2. R.A Salvatore 3. Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth 4. Eragon 5. Malazan And by far Malazan was his favorite. And I understood why. He reminded me of this girl I used to date who liked to get punched in the stomach occasionally whenever we were making out. Later I found out that all the previous men in her life had been convicted sex offenders. MartingaleJack fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Mar 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
No one cares about your stupid, made-up anecdotes comparing people who like a series to people who have a thing for sex offenders. Not liking a series is fine but at this point you're just calling anyone who does like it an idiot and then acting smug about it. In fact, that's ALL you've posted since this derail started. Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Mar 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:No one cares about your stupid, made-up anecdotes comparing people who like a series to people who have a thing for sex offenders. I care about them. Please tell us the story of the tortoise and the Malazan fan next.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
I think there's been more posts about Mazalan than there have been about Joe Abercrombies books in this thread. Two things I've learned here, Mazalan fans are insufferable and I have no desire to read those books.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
One big difference is that Joe writes characters that have clear cut personailties and goals, that actually change in terms of goals and personalities as the stories go on. And I know I've been ragging on Malazan, but I actually like the second book and wrote a positive review of it: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3459058&pagenumber=3&perpage=40#post399522925 I had hoped Erikson would progress as a writer, but every book beyond Deadhouse Gates is actually worse than the one that came before it. If you try to describe the character arcs in Joe's books, its easy. If you try to talk about the characterrs in Malazan, you can't without discussing their progression in terms of how powerful they've become. I thought the best character in the first three books was Felisin, but even she eventually falls to this trope. Abercrombie: Logen is a noble brute who fights against the part of himself that revels in bloodlust. He tries to be a better man and sometimes he succeeds but mostly he fails. Erikson: Ganoes Paran is a guy who...he uh...well, he dies and then gets brought back to life for reasons known only to the gods. Then he becomes megapowerful because he attacks or frees a giant demon dog that's imprisoned inside a mystical sword and then he becomes a Deckmaster, which has to do with magic poker cards or something, but it makes him even more crazy powerful even though he doesn't really do anything with it. Abercrombie: Monza is a woman who was betrayed by her brother and her employer. She wants revenge over anything else and sets down the dark path of achieving it. Only she realizes that things are a lot more complicated than black and white, and that she's becoming just as horrible or worse than the people she's set out to kill. Erikson: Quick Ben is this crazy powerful mage who has absorbed the powers and personalities of other crazy powerful mages, which makes him even more crazy powerful, but no one even knows HOW crazy powerful he really is. Maybe even the crazy powerfullest. Abercrombie: Temple is a man who always does the safe thing, and this makes him believe that he is a coward. He struggles with this aspect of his personality, learns to stick his neck out for something he cares about, and learns that a good man isn't necessarily a brave one. Erikson: Felisin is betrayed by her sister. She's sent to a horrible prison, where she initially vows revenge, but ends up getting addicted to heroin. And it turns out her sister didn't totally screw her over, because men are sent to protect Felisin. Except Felisin still wants revenge. Which is interesting until Felisin becomes a goddess of rage or something and all that boring human stuff is out the window. You'll notice that with Abercrombie, a person's "power" never plays an important part of their character arc. I'm not saying Malazan is terrible because it degenerates into power fantasy, but to honestly say that Erikson writes good characters you must be very poorly read, and I think most people are just irrationally defensive of the weakest aspect of the series they love. Its like back in college when I dated Sarah Jessica Parker. One of my frat bros thought she had a hideous face and we got into this big fist fight because I wouldn't admit it, even though we both knew I was only into her for her body. There are other reasons people enjoy Malazan. They are reasons I do not share or endorse, but I understand how the allure might be there depending on your reading background or your penchant for playing all night sessions of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
This isn't the thread for it but you're really underselling Erikson's characters and reducing them to their barest of plot points. Paran is an inexperienced noble placed in command of a legendary company known for being nearly impossible to direct, to the point that they outright kill officers they don't like. Quick Ben is a powerful character but at times he's too clever for his own good and at other times he's not clever enough, and he remains a persistent mystery throughout the series that hasn't been explained. Felisin's human stuff is still a huge factor after the second book and I'm surprised you missed it. She adopts a mistreated refuge and even names her Felisin the Younger after herself, but is so absorbed by her godhood status that she completely misses the abuse going on against her adopted charge. Both Felisin stories are tragedies. The difference between Abercrombie and Erikson when it comes to characters is that Abercrombie writes directly from the perspective of his characters while Erikson follows one character around a scene and narrates. Abercrombie focuses on a mall cast of well-developed characters while Erikson prefers a large cast of active players in the plot. They're different styles but that doesn't mean all of Erikson's characters are poo poo. The scope of the writing is just entirely different. I think it sucks that you're not only discouraging people from reading one of the best fantasy stories ever written but also insulting the people who enjoyed it. The Ninth Layer fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:tThey're different styles but that doesn't mean all of Erikson's characters are poo poo. Hey, it's cool, I'm not insulting you because your a Malazan reader. Your past experiences have made you into the person you are and given you the tastes you have today. I mean, I noticed that most of your posts on these forums go in the Game Room, which is the table top pen and paper D&D sub-forum, right? Malazan is probably pretty fantastic as the D&D campaign it started out as. But as a book series on its own merits its pretty lacking. But hey, like I said before I get the appeal. I had this dog once that ate his own crap. He hadn't been taught better and it was in his nature. It didn't make me think any less of the dog. Abercrombie isn't literary gold or anything, but at least he can write people well enough that a boy raised on a healthy diet of Patrick O'Brian and Dostoevsky and Joyce and Mccarthy can stomach it. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 07:58
|
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:I had this dog once that ate his own crap. He hadn't been taught better and it was in his nature. It didn't make me think any less of the dog. "Malazan is a fine series and I don't think you're a bad person for liking it. Also, you are a dog that's too stupid to not eat your own crap."  I don't even know how to Malazan, this tangent is just getting pretty stupid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 08:15
|
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:Hey, it's cool, I'm not insulting you because your a Malazan reader. Your past experiences have made you into the person you are and given you the tastes you have today. I mean, I noticed that most of your posts on these forums go in the Game Room, which is the table top pen and paper D&D sub-forum, right? Malazan is probably pretty fantastic as the D&D campaign it started out as. But as a book series on its own merits its pretty lacking. But hey, like I said before I get the appeal. You must be a real pleasure to know in person...
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 08:49
|
|
|
Abercrombie has a twitter account now @LordGrimdark
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 10:55
|
|
|
I had a dog once who got really haughty over his wizard novel of choice and I was like 'hey dog stop that it's pretty silly'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Hey guys, this is kind of a stupid derail, people like what they like and can be douches about what other people like So who wants Gorst to show up in the nest book? I thought I remembered someone saying he would have a cameo in Red Country. Sex Beef 2.0 fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
Quick Red Country question. Spring break is next week and I'm planning on making it my downtime book, but an Amazon customer review mentioned that the Kindle version formatted awfully; with crammed sentences, typos everywhere, etc. Can anyone confirm if that's really the case? It seems like half the time when I see this stuff mentioned, I go ahead and buy it on kindle and have no issues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
I had no issues with Red Country on Kindle (UK). I think there was a typo, but that's all I remember.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Quick Red Country question. Spring break is next week and I'm planning on making it my downtime book, but an Amazon customer review mentioned that the Kindle version formatted awfully; with crammed sentences, typos everywhere, etc. Can anyone confirm if that's really the case? It seems like half the time when I see this stuff mentioned, I go ahead and buy it on kindle and have no issues. Someone had that issue when it first came out, but I remember them saying they redownloaded it a week or two later and the issue was resolved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
TheWorldIsSquare posted:Hey guys, this is kind of a stupid derail, people like what they like and can be douches about what other people like I've never cared much about Gorst. B9 was my favorite character in the trilogy, but I feel like his glory days are kind of over now. I'd like to see Ferro. And Bayaz. Each time we've seen Bayaz after the trilogy it has been only a glimpse at most. drat it Joe, you know we know how important he is. Just let us look what he's doing already! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
I hated Gorst on my first read of The Heroes but grew to really like him on my second read. I warmed to The Heroes on my second read in general, really. I just like the idea of a guy who is a really good at killing things, but... well, that's all he's good at. He's so inept at social situations that he spends all his time not killing things wishing he was killing things. His whiny narration annoyed me at first but I sort of accepted it when I realized that was the point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
Rurik posted:I'd like to see Ferro. I'd like to see Ferro too! Also, the Prophet, who hasn't had a chance to shine yet despite being a character of such importance!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Rurik posted:I've never cared much about Gorst. B9 was my favorite character in the trilogy, but I feel like his glory days are kind of over now. I'd like to see Ferro. And Bayaz. Each time we've seen Bayaz after the trilogy it has been only a glimpse at most. drat it Joe, you know we know how important he is. Just let us look what he's doing already! The next trilogy is going to have to be pretty inclusive given all the stuff they've set up. Save for Logan I think the Red Country characters were at a good place where he doesn't need to go back to them, but the story definitely calls for more Monza, Calder, Ferro, and someone in the union leadership(hopefully Glokta). (Bayaz goes without saying.) Granted, he eschew expectations and tell the whole thing from the Gurkhish perspective, but no way do those characters not play a role. Personally I want a Khalul perspective but I don't know if he wants to kill the mystery there. Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that Abercrombie's said that his next trilogy is going to skip ahead twenty years or so and is going to focus a lot on the children of some of the characters from the previous books.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
I don't know why they need to be relatives of past
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 07:06
|
|
|
That sounds awesome. Honestly as much as I adore most of his characters there is such a thing as too much of a good thing, and too much exposition. I love the world and I think most of the characters have had their fair time. I found Ferro pretty one-dimensional. I think that's the problem with Khalul too: he has a simple motivation and anyways he's basically just Bayaz's counterpart. Just picture a Bayaz who's darker in skin color. They have the same lack of morals, the same unlimited influence, the same ancient grudge. Surprised no one's mentioned Cosca as an awesome character yet. He's definitely among the best. Maybe I have a really soft spot for eloquent, nihilistic drunks. Morveer was good too, kinda like Gorst with his almost automatic hate and bile for others yet always wondering why people don't treat him well. IMO the best thing about Abercrombie's characters is their enduring hypocrisy which reminds me of so many people I've known. Honestly I've seen abercrombie write one-segment throwaway characters who end up dying in a battle with someone's sword through their back that have more depth than the main characters of a lot of other fantasy authors I've read.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
savinhill posted:I'm pretty sure that Abercrombie's said that his next trilogy is going to skip ahead twenty years or so and is going to focus a lot on the children of some of the characters from the previous books. So we get the teen version of Bloody-Nine? At least we won't get the teen version of Glokta, considering he is neutered. On this, which characters are actually viable for having kids.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Play posted:Surprised no one's mentioned Cosca as an awesome character yet. He's definitely among the best. Maybe I have a really soft spot for eloquent, nihilistic drunks. Morveer was good too, kinda like Gorst with his almost automatic hate and bile for others yet always wondering why people don't treat him well. Morveer was certainly awesome but Cosca definitely wore out his welcome by Red Country. I wasn't amused by his antics any more, I just wanted him gone. I guess I don't share the love for Gorst others have either, I never really felt sympathy for him the way I did even for Morveer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 15:27
|
|