|
I used to think Name of the Wind was objectively bad. I've since come to realize that it's really just not a book for me. I'm a fan of Joe Abercrombie, George R.R. Martin and Scott Lynch, of course, but if I were to call those objectively good, I'd be equally mistaken in saying that their depictions of humanity were the most realistic. Granted, they're a little more realistic than the concept of Kvothe is great, everyone who hates him is ugly and stupid, but they're still unrealistic in that everyone tends toward the sheer, unrelenting, unrepentant jerk ends of things, which is also a little silly. In the end, it's fantasy, and if you can swallow the premise, you'll find a great story in there. Me, I couldn't. It's still an excellent piece and I recognize its value, but it wasn't for me. I'd have an easier time saying it was bad if I didn't know Rothfuss did a lot of work with charity and busted his butt for it. anathenema fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Nov 16, 2010 |
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
mabbott74 posted:I don't know why people have a problem with Kvothe being so good at everything. He is known by many and there is a reason why. You don't get famous by being an idiot who is mediocre at best in 3 or 4 things. I mean, who wants to read a book about some guy who struggles through life never amounting to anything? If there were a huge audience for that kind of thing, then I would write and autobiography and make millions. Seems some people can't just read a book and enjoy it for being a work of fiction that has no relevance to real life. I take some issue with this. All fiction has relevance to real life. Not always a lot, not always clearly, but it's there. In fact, I think the fact that a lot of people are suspecting that Kvothe is actually a depressed burnout who just happens to be a talented liar is proof enough of that. They are relating to the book in a way that's not explicitly direct, thus suggesting it has at least enough relevance to them to look beyond the initial pages. Which is also what a lot of people are complaining about. They see it as having no relevance to real life. I can't help but agree that Kvothe just sort of gets everything his way with no real problems or conflicts. It'd be one thing if he was good at everything and had to triumph over adversity to get it, but that doesn't really seem to be the case in a lot of the story. It winds up being an awesome guy being awesome with no one trying to stop him except the stupid and ugly. If that were the case, then it would have no relevance, because no one has that problem.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 02:29
|
|
|
A Nice Boy posted:I dunno, I think he goes through some pretty hard poo poo, especially at the beginning when he's homeless. I just think that the fact that it's being narrated by him in the future takes some of the danger and suspense out of it, as we know that no matter what happens, he's going to survive to become this badass wizard. If he'd written the same story as a third person at the time it was happening, I think it would have felt a lot less "easy" for his character. It wasn't that, really. I knew he was going to survive, true, but I didn't know how. I was a little disappointed that the answer was "easily and without any threat whatsoever."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 05:18
|
|
|
SaviourX posted:Breaking out of genre-bound stuff, there's other authors who do similarly 'epic' works that cover different worlds and/or cultures, rules, spans of times, that are contained to less-than-doorstopper novels. With the exception of someone like say Martin, padding is padding, and SFF needs to learn that page count does not equal quality or development (and even Martin needs editing down, as the bad thread has agreed). Erikson is a bad example because his books could easily be half the length they are. That and the 'rule' I mentioned applies more to the narrative than the literal timeline. This might just be something that's one of those divides in fantasy readers, like whether or not dragons are cliched, but I don't think that a lack of big worldbuilding is necessarily a hindrance. Frequently, I find that epic worldbuilding tends to translate to a bunch of names of characters, places or things that don't feature in the story for the sake of making things bigger. I'm perfectly fine with a story that's light on worldbuilding and heavy on character development. Though, the lack of it has already been pointed out as a flaw with this book.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2010 14:59
|
|
|
treeboy posted:im starting to feel like im either stupid or a bad person for really liking his book and eagerly anticipating a sequel Not at all. Unless a book is a manifesto of hate crimes or something, you should never feel bad for liking a book. Rothfuss' prose is excellent and his character, while undoubtedly Mary Sue, is likable. Artistically, it's really good. Structurally, maybe less so.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2010 04:57
|
|
|
mabbott74 posted:Some people just seem that they go into books with the thought "ok, how can I bash this popular book to make myself seem like some iGenius." This seems like kind of a silly thing to say. Criticism does not make it a terrible book; even Name's most adamant critics seem to admire its prose and structure. Accepting that not all books are for all people is a healthy attitude to have, same with recognizing that a good book can have flaws. I won't deny that some people do, in fact, go in a book ready to hate it. The whole fad of "angry critics" has basically assured this. However, I don't think that's what's going on here. I'd love to hear you go into arc vs. development, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2010 11:37
|
|
|
King Crab posted:He might be talented at music, bullshitting, dragonslaying and so on, but that doesn't mean he is 100% infallible. Everybody makes mistakes bro. I think that's the problem. He does make mistakes, but he is 100% infallible. Everything that happens to him is either a trick of someone ugly and stupid who is just jealous of how awesome he is or is instantly reversed by...whatever. I was actually getting excited when Kvothe was expelled from university for (I think) setting the alchemy lab on fire. But then he was granted a full pardon on the very next page.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2010 04:44
|
|
|
onefish posted:The actual publisher is still listing the third book as out in February 2011 (http://www.orionbooks.co.uk/books/the-republic-of-thieves-hardback), so I believe it will happen. Haven't heard a thing from Lynch himself on the internet in months, though, so no idea how things will proceed afterward. It's been pushed back to November of 2011. http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/01/fiction-affliction-diagnosing-february-releases-in-fantasy
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:So would I like this series if I find mary-sue type characters really annoying? Eh. It's 50/50. On the one hand, Kvote is a superchildprodigygeniusboy who always gets what he wants and frequently does so without even trying. But on the other hand, a lot of people who said they hate Mary Sues have wound up loving this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2011 08:30
|
|
|
HeroOfTheRevolution posted:I basically picture everyone reacting to Kvothe like he's an autistic, red-headed 15 year old who talks and acts like he's 60. Basically, everyone just thinks he's super weird. I would have really liked this. But everyone's reactions to Kvothe were half my problem with Name. He's a genius, he's musically talented, women adore him but he's oh so pure. I get that. I could work with that if people actually found him insufferable, arrogant or otherwise thick-headed. But everyone loves him. They heap rewards on him for just existing. The only people who don't are so transparently jealous and stupid that they might as well just tack "Malfoy" on at the end.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2011 06:34
|
|
|
Benson Cunningham posted:If Abercrombie wrote the last book instead of Rothfuss, this entire trilogy would be redeemed. And yet, Abercrombie didn't really kill any of the core characters (with the exception of some of the Named Men). Jezal, Logen, Bayaz, Ferro and Glokta all survived. But it wasn't a sappy, happy ending by any means. Abercrombie understands at least how to hit tragedy, futility and "adult" themes without killing everyone off. Edit: spoilered some stuff. anathenema fucked around with this message at 05:43 on Jul 18, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2011 05:15
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Hahaha "I don't really look for criticism" "As a writer, you get used to the fact that some people are going to hate what you write" Admittedly, I think his books are overhyped, but I didn't read any arrogance in his reply and I think he's actually speaking truth. Not every piece of criticism need be taken and some just can't be taken without compromising what the story is all about. A lot of people don't like the fact that Scott Lynch's books include swearing and that his characters are thieving jerkwads, either. He can't really do anything about that because the story is about thieving jerkwads and there's a lot of swearing in it. The sex is creepy and idealized, yes. It's awkward and weird and flowery, but that's kind of the point of the story. Kvothe is a goon. This is his journey. His sex is going to be awkward and flowery and poetic, because that's what sex is to him. Rothfuss can't really do anything to change that without turning Kvothe into a not-goon, which changes the story. Maybe what makes people upset is that the book does not act or treat Kvothe like a goon, which he most assuredly is (and really, that's what I feel betrays it and makes it hollower). But even though it doesn't appeal to us doesn't mean it doesn't appeal to someone. It's frequently a cop-out to suggest that the reader just doesn't "get it." The reader can often disagree with what's going on, though, and that's usually what happens. And you can't really take criticism from the internet, let alone criticism from people who disagree with the fundamental idea of the book, because then it's not really your book, but a book by committee. A committee who are interested in what appeals to you and makes you happy being totally wrong and wanting the exact opposite.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 01:41
|
|
|
I don't think Locke's goony obsession with a girl and Kvothe's goony obsession with a girl can really be compared. They're two entirely different tones. I distinctly remember Locke idealizing her, but rarely speaking of it and when he did, the mere mention of it caused his friends to call him out on how she nearly ruined/killed him. Whereas Kvothe goes on about how her cheeks are like apples and her love is the summer storm and that's just how it is and if you don't think so then you are ugly and dumb like Ambrose. People actually challenge Locke and he's very frequently wrong. Besides, Scott Lynch is at least seventy different kinds of awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2011 07:50
|
|
|
WeWereSchizo posted:Elodin does get him to jump off a roof. And get stuck naked on a roof in a storm. And nearly gets him busted for setting Hemme's rooms on fire. Yeah, but everyone just applauds these for the acts of genius that they really are.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2011 02:32
|
|
|
Red Seas Under Red Skies would have been less difficult if they hadn't checked out to go play pirates for half the book.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
soru posted:I'm probably not understanding what you're saying here. It seems like you're saying Kvothe doesn't have heroic attributes, which is silly since he's the smartest, the best at magic, the best at loving ninjas and faeries, the best at playing guitar, the best at breaking bullies' arms, etc. He saves maidens in distress, he battles oppression, he fights dragons, and so on. Yeah, I'm not really sure what mistakes he makes. Even when he does, there's no real penalty or punishment for it. I don't think he has any heroic qualities, he's just the best at everything. And because he's the best at everything, everyone believes Kvothe is awesome except for really terrible, shallow people who are stupid and ugly. Which is a very weird parallel for the series. The more people insist that Kvothe is heroic, the more people think he is heroic. The more people insist that Rothfuss is a genius, the more people believe it without actually looking at it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 04:06
|
|
|
Kneel Before Zog posted:So Kvothe doesn't eventually surpass everyone in the Arcanum and becomes wizard god and kicks all kinds of rear end? No, he does. He just doesn't do it eventually. He's born as the best wizard alive. The journey is more about making everyone else realize that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2012 12:03
|
|
|
The thing is, he doesn't ever seem to be called on it. By anyone. There's no evidence to suggest that he's unreliable at all. When he hurts people, he makes it clear that they deserved it. Every character in the story lines up to nod and tell him how much they deserved it. Then we zoom out and the characters in the framing story tell us how much they deserved it. And we don't have much beyond that, either. Even if there is something else besides the idealized badass Kvothe, there's no sign of it. He never really flinches or breaks character. It's just 100% badass, 100% of the time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
xyzzyx posted:The sex scenes were meant to subvert the prudish nature of earlier fantasy fiction. I'll give him some credit for trying, but I have to agree with you. The book might have been better without it. What, really? I know he accused people of being prudes about their being weirded out by the Felurian chapters, but I thought that was him explaining away their criticisms rather than actually deliberately trying to upset the status quo.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2012 04:57
|
|
|
I don't think Rothfuss is a misogynist. He doesn't really hate women. Nor does he really seem to think they're inferior. He just doesn't think they're people. Which is still bad.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2012 07:31
|
|
|
Yeah, that was a pretty stupid thing of me to say. But for as much as I dislike the narrative, I don't think Rothfuss is a legitimate bad guy. He has some pretty messed-up ideas about women, of course.
anathenema fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Oct 5, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
That all assumes that it'll end in three books. I'm pretty sure that's not going to be the case.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Well, yes. Most of the plot is designed to make Kvothe more of a superman. These things aren't widespread so that when Kvothe does them, they can be all the more special.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2012 06:24
|
|
|
MoreLikeTen posted:Of this list the one I can really sympathize with is Denna. Holy hell, get over her. But reddit level views on women? Where specifically do you see this? I think if there's any reddit outlook on a specific relationship, it would be in the Eragon books (which, to my eternal shame and regret, I finished). Obviously, someone else being worse doesn't excuse anything, but I really did not pick up on a niceguy vibe. Sorry, could you clarify this? It kind of sounds like you're saying "yes, there are a lot of flaws, but if you don't look at them, it's a really good book." I couldn't really enjoy the shoestring budget aspect because he just kind of seemed to get money from everywhere whenever he needed it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 04:36
|
|
|
The Ferretbrain Review is pretty good at summarizing what's the matter with it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 06:02
|
|
|
TychoCelchuuu posted:Child's Play just posted a bunch of pictures from their charity auction a week ago and in amongst the depressingly but unsurprisingly large number of fedoras I found two pictures of Patrick Rothfuss. So, those definitely belong in our little fan/antifan club. Eh. Despite some weird ideas about women, I don't think Rothfuss is a terrible person. He does a lot for charity and genuinely isn't a jerk. At a (semi) ritzy event, I find it hard to be mad at him for wearing a top hat. I'd probably do the same.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 09:33
|
|
|
CaptCommy posted:Rothfuss is a smart man. He can comment on feminism in fantasy because he gets it. This is why I cannot stand people who think Kvothe is a self-insert. Sure, maybe he's a little too good at too many things, but that's because the story is about a Man of Legend. I can 100% guarantee that this is not a loving self-insert, woe-is-me nice guys story. His treatment of Denna has never worked out for him and that's not going to change until he grows the gently caress up. I'd buy this more readily had it not been for that one blog post he made about The Hobbit movie and comparing it to that shy, sweet girl he used to know that became a party girl who was popular with everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
Prince of Thorns was well-written, but I feel it tries a little too hard. Plus, the author's a loving creep, so there's that. Anyway, to recommend something new The Emperor's Blades by Brian Staveley is very fun and fast-paced. Something exciting after relentless grimdark cynicism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Ornamented Death posted:What? Mark Lawrence writes some messed-up stuff on occasion, but he's pretty far from a creep. Most of what he posts online is just raffles for copies of his books, with proceeds going to the hospice service his daughter uses, or goofy contests for the same books. Usually, sure. But there was that time he sicced his fanbase on another author for tweeting that she didn't like his book.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Ornamented Death posted:Without digging through his blog archive, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess this was one of several cases where he quoted a "review" that made a lot of blatantly false claims about his books because they didn't bother to read past the first ten pages. From there his fans probably dog-piled on whoever he called out, which is unfortunate, but hardly makes him a creep. In this case, it was a reviewer tweeting that she read it and didn't care for what she perceived as a lack of female agency. At which point, he did exactly what you said and exactly that happened. I thought it was pretty gross, considering she requested he not do that and he more or less just giggled at her. quote:It's just an example of how ridiculous the fandom of sci-fi and fantasy has gotten. There's a group of people (and I'll include myself here) that won't read anything by certain writers based on a history of being a worthless human being (Card and Simmons being two frequently brought up). There's a decent argument to be made here for separating the artist from their work, but it's been covered numerous times elsewhere on this forum so I won't get in to it other than to say that I think both sides have valid points. I will agree with this, too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Ornamented Death posted:Wait. This reviewer wrote a negative review, or had something negative to say, then specifically called Lawrence's attention to it on the supremely public forum that is Twitter, and was then upset when he and his fans responded? I mean, it's a dick move if he called for a response, no doubt, but you have to be kind of dumb to not expect some level of response if you're baiting someone like that. No. She posted that she didn't care for the story to her own twitter feed. It somehow came to Lawrence's attention and he retweeted it to his followers, at which point they flooded her feed with a lot of namecalling and other internet behaviors. She asked him to tell them to stop. I'm not sure if he did or didn't. But he also likes trotting out his Tor.com review, which always gets the reviewer lots of nasty emails. quote:Edit: For clarity's sake, since that up there toes the line of victim-blaming, I see nothing wrong with challenging the validity of the reviewer's claims. Since this is the internet and people are horrible, I'm sure it was a lot worse than that, and gently caress anyone that took it any farther than a purely academic argument. It was pretty grotesque.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:His next release will be a critical. A good book will likely silence many of his detractor, but not all. Another bad book will place him beside the likes of Peter V Brett, who squandered a promising career and will be soon forgotten. Genuinely curious: what did Brett do to earn peoples' ire? I see support for him growing less enthusiastic lately. I had a hard time making it past book one after the weird sex stuff. But I think he still sells like gangbusters and hit the list with most of his books.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2016 00:06
|
|