[Agraba]

When I first started the series, and the latest release was Midnight Tides, I was pleased with the evolution of his writing style; I felt it was getting better. But after MT, I think it started going downhill.

Since the beginning, he had the tendency to have 5+ plots running, and to shift between them rather rapidly. It's fine to an extent. The thing is, he used to cover a lot in one "section" (when I say section, I mean the body of text that runs in between to space gaps, to indicate the shifting of plot). I can see this just by having referred to Gardens of the Moon while having read TtH.

In GotM for example, one section would involve Hairlock getting ripped by hounds, ST, Cot and Anomander appearing, a launched attack where AR kills two hounds, Ganoes staying in the aftermath to feel the blood, going into the sword, talking to Draconus, freeing the hounds and appearing back on the plains. If SE were to write this now, I'd expect it to be in four different sections, where the follies of all Hairlock's actions would cover a couple of pages, getting ripped apart, then "someone" appearing in answer, and then a change in section. And this event would end up spanning a few chapters, where every time we return to the scene, it gives SE an excuse to meander on worldly wisdom from a character's point of view, and the changing of scene at an event one might call big.

Sure, from the start, at GotM SE already worked on replacing the density of events with meaningful narration and some dialogue which started out as a good thing and brought him to his peak of writing style in MT, IMO. Then he took it further with each successive book and it's degrading his style. In TtH it just became quite aggravating. I think this is his longets book yet (it's hard to tell, having 1-5 in small paperback and 6-8 in big version, but I seem to recall at BH's release someone saying that BH is the longest by far, and TtH is now bigger than both BH and RG) and yet I feel he could've written it very well in the length of something like Deadhouse Gates or Midnight Tides, even with keeping all the plotlines, like Humble Measure, that loanshark's list, that god created by the blind Tiste Andii which seemed to just be pointless.

On a side note, he seems to be adopting two more slightly annoying tendencies - saying "fuck" a lot (I like the few times he'd say it in BH and RG but now he's just taking the impact away from it) and the excessive use of brackets.

[Urb]

I also find the philosophical musings to be less impressive than they were in the earlier books (when they were more a result of conversations between characters, something which also made the characters more mysterious and interesting. I'm really glad Karsa Orlong didn't have any internal monologues).

For the first time while reading something from SE I found I actually wanted to skip certain paragraphs because they were getting a bit too boring. And I didn't have the usual problems with putting the book down, because this time it just wasn't exciting enough. The usual brilliance was still shining through in there though. Still a very good book, and I suspect it shall be even better after a reread

[Skywalker]

Urb;351146 said:

For the first time while reading something from SE I found I actually wanted to skip certain paragraphs because they were getting a bit too boring. And I didn't have the usual problems with putting the book down, because this time it just wasn't exciting enough. The usual brilliance was still shining through in there though. Still a very good book, and I suspect it shall be even better after a reread

Completely agree with you there - I actually did (gasp) skip a few paragraphs that went on and on about the Redeemer and the Dying God. Never thought I'd hate Itkovian, but I came close in this one.

I think SE's problem also is that what used to be a series of nice tight standalone novels (true upto MT) has now gone into Transition Novel territory. Upto MT it was nicely compartmentalized into three storylines on three continents. Different members in the cast of characters had their own fish to fry, and it was adding up to a nice pastiche/ tapestry/ whatever.

Now (best example) Karsa Orlong has been in three books in a row, and I simply do not know why. Did SE fall in love with the character and conspire to bring him to 7Cs, Lether, and Genabackis in convoluted, timeline skewing ways just for that one reason?

There is also more character/ storyline flab as Agraba says in the OP... I cannot for the life of me say why Envy/ Spite, Iskaral Pust/ Mogora, Cutter, the Hounds of Light, etc were all at the convergence at the end of TtH because, well, they came... they saw... they did things inconsequential... and left.

Is SE finding it challenging to juggle the cast of characters to only have the thematically and plot-wise relevant ones show up? Is this world simply too vast and convoluted for SE to manage all the characters credibly? Is he bowing to fan (or self) anticipation in showing things like Cutter's homecoming, an Envy/ Spite or Kruppe/ Pust showdown, and so on?

Whatever the reason, SE's latest three books - TB, RG, TtH - could all have done with a mite of... um... thematic integrity.

Which is not to say that I didn't howl excitedly when Rake offed Hood, or that I wont pre-order DoD and tCG... but I am more tempered in my fandom than I was post-MT.

[Urb]

Skywalker;351162 said:

Now (best example) Karsa Orlong has been in three books in a row, and I simply do not know why. Did SE fall in love with the character and conspire to bring him to 7Cs, Lether, and Genabackis in convoluted, timeline skewing ways just for that one reason?

It seems to me SE really likes to philosophise about the nature of (modern) civilization. There were some great conversations between Karsa and Samar Dev in tBH that I loved to read.

From another thread, I read that SE told someone he wrote about Kelyk because he wanted to explore our own civilization's addiction to oil, and keep himself interested. Now that is really interesting. Would it be too boring (for himself) to just play it all out like he planned from the start?

This is just my own thoughts on the subject of course. I'm not putting words in SE's mouth here.
For all I know I'm totally wrong about this

[Agraba]

Skywalker, you raise a different issue from my own, but one equally worthy of consideration.

He had too many characters to juggle, and indeed their final acts were inconsequential, for this reason: For the convergence and climatic moments of Darujhistan, the primary spotlights were on characters that weren't even in Darujhistan throughout the book, which was quite galling! It's as if all the hundreds of pages spent in Darujhistan throughout the book on characters like Harllo, Cutter, Scorth & Leff, etc... were all moot, and the only significant ones were the 3 or 4 pages spent on Gaz the killer. Now I'm not opposed to those plots, I liked them in fact. It's just that it felt like the ending of the book was missing, and he replaced it with the ending of an entirely different book.

My main quarrel, however, is with his tendency to make a lot less events occur in what I call a "section". Any time there is a single event, or even the remote indication of an impending event, that seems to give him an excuse to change scenarios. And when he returns to that particular scenario, in a new section, it gives him another excuse to effect a whole new introduction with his philosophical observations, which would sometimes even prevent said impending event from occurring!

[Cause]

Well this is now the third thread with such sentiments. So it seems its definatly not an isolated feeling

[Karsa Oblong]

Let's face it, some of SE's philosophical musings (played out through his characters) are fascinating, funny, insightful, thought-provoking. But when it comes to this stuff a little goes a long way and, in my opinion, the last three books - including TtH - have suffered from having too much introspection.
And as several posters have mentioned in this thread, when you combine this with SE's recent tendency to salami-slice the action into smaller chunks it definitely makes for a more frustrating read.
This series is still the best fantasy series out there but I just wish SE could rediscover a little of the confident pacing that was so evident in GotM, DG, MoI etc.

[Sindriss]

Actually, I am beginning to like Karsa more now than when he was introduced in HoC. He isn't so certain anylonger, he is actually deeply affected by watching the battle between DU and Rake and his view on civilization is understandable. Hmm, does that make me a cynic or crazy?

[Agraba]

Sindriss;351319 said:

Actually, I am beginning to like Karsa more now than when he was introduced in HoC. He isn't so certain anylonger, he is actually deeply affected by watching the battle between DU and Rake and his view on civilization is understandable. Hmm, does that make me a cynic or crazy?

Not at all. Only someone born under immense privileges with no exposure or knowledge of unprivileged worlds would have entirely positive things to say about civilization. Likely (but not certainly) people hanging here - including me - who have internet connection feel mostly the benign side of civilization but Karsa is entirely right in that it is built to breed followers, and those lowest rung are made to suffer in order to keep the balance. This theme is also greatly touched upon in Darujhistan itself, and I think some of Challice's PoVs on the delusion that one's currently privileged position is due entirely to their exceptional skills or intellect (even in our world where that is partially the case but considering it to be the entire factor is a delusion).

That is my take, at least.

[Anomander Rake]

I agree with some of the main points most people have pointed. He pacing in the early books, the amount of philosphy and musings were just about right, and the plots, sub plots etc all came superbly together at the end.

But the later books, the Philosphical musings etc, rather than showing it from from just a few characters, he changed it to almost every character there, and it really slows down the book, drags it in many places especially as they can last pages, and had me skipping paragraphs which is unlike me with the series so far. In the past he managed to mix these philosphical musings etc with history in the malazan world, or as in DG as people walked through ruins and old civilisations.

The characters musing that I did enjoy were people like Endest Silann, who's musings where mixed with the histories of the Andii and well written.

The way he continues to mature Karsa I think has been great. He've slowly seen him mature and why he changes certain ways he would have acted previously. And his thinking and reaction to Dessem Ultor and Rake fighting, continue to show him learning and not going headlong as he would have when young.

And the time he gave to Kallor allowed us to see a whole different side to him (though I still dislike Kallor).

Oh and I loved every moment where Rake is mentioned or is shown, and think those scenes where very very well done. For me, Rake has always been the most fascinating character by far, the most appealing to read etc. And I think Erikson did well in showing him from other peoples point of view without actually giving Rake his own viewpoint, which continues to cloak certain amount of mystery around Rake.

[Sinisdar Toste]

you know these are all good points and all valid, the bookending of chapters with kruppes monologues dragged at times, the philosophizing was prolonged and ubiquitous across the cast of characters, the plot dragged throughout the book as you wondered where all these dire hints of it being "too late" and such were going.

yet i think SE wrote exactly what he intended to write. he told us that this book would have a completely different style, and he probably isn't losing any sleep because some of us have a few things against it.

i didnt skip any paragraphs. i didnt dare. ever word SE writes can be tied in and connected to a myriad of other causes and actions in this world. if you don't read everything i think you miss the subtle nuance that pervades SE's work. it may be complex and plodding in story at times but your brain always has to flying in ten directions.

[Kurt Montandon]

I thought the absurd over-introspective philosophizing was at its worst among the Drift Avalii Tiste Andii, and anything to do with the High Priestess of the Redeemer - pare about fifty pages of that out, and it's a great book. Re-reads should prove much more entertaining, because I know what dross to skip (anything to do with Itkovian, or any of Nimander's companions, except where they encounter Gothos).

As someone else pointed out, he used to limit such stuff to a few paragraphs from a handful of characters, but now it seems like everyone has to muse and mull over the Meaning Of The Tragedy Of Life, etc., etc. I hope Erikson got it out of his system (I'm under the impression that there was something personally tragic going on in his life during the writing of TTH, but may be mistaken).

I didn't, contrasting with others, find any of the actual plots themselves to be superfluous. Just the way some of the characters heads were delved into, way too deeply.

Oh, and people should keep in mind that this book was - for the most part - written in Kruppe's narrative voice, which could be very amusing and insightful at times, but at other times a bit too much like Kruppe's dialogue voice. Might have been the wrong book to try this particular writing style experiment - perhaps the 11th "epilogue" book would have been a better time.

[Aptorian]

I will agree that Kruppe narating the story got old half way through. Erikson himself said something before the release about some people were going to like the voice and others would hate it.

It was Eriksons father that died during the writting of TTH by the way.

[phart]

the weird thing with the ubiquitous nihilism in characters is almost everyone shares the same view point be it Karsa or a random. I almost wonder why Karsa says it breeds sheep when just about every character who philosphises shares his view. We haven't really had much alternative philosphy. Or why every character shares the same beliefs to a point.

Incidentaly this might be a bit unfair but for me there is a "Dawson's Creek" quality to it as well, with everyone able to elucidate with remarkable clarity regardless of their status. Bit like in Dawson's creek where everyone has a the oratory and vocabularly skills of someone much higher than a "16 year old".

[caladanbrood]

phart;352621 said:

almost everyone shares the same view point be it Karsa or a random. I almost wonder why Karsa says it breeds sheep when just about every character who philosphises shares his view.

I think this is half the point. Karsa has sworn to destroy civilisation, but the individuals are no different from him. The point being, Karsa has never been in a situation where mob mentality takes over.

Even if all individuals think something is stupid, a group made up of those individuals could well end up doing it.

[Sinisdar Toste]

phart;352621 said:

the weird thing with the ubiquitous nihilism in characters is almost everyone shares the same view point be it Karsa or a random. I almost wonder why Karsa says it breeds sheep when just about every character who philosphises shares his view. We haven't really had much alternative philosphy. Or why every character shares the same beliefs to a point.

Incidentaly this might be a bit unfair but for me there is a "Dawson's Creek" quality to it as well, with everyone able to elucidate with remarkable clarity regardless of their status. Bit like in Dawson's creek where everyone has a the oratory and vocabularly skills of someone much higher than a "16 year old".

i agree with the dawsons creek bit somewhat, most soldiers don't have a websters dictionary, yet they seem to have a vocabulary that baruk would envy.

for the other part though, i think that the points of view and philisophical stand points are pretty varied. in this book we had a lot of viewpoints from characters with layers and layers of sorrow on their shoulders. nimander, murillio, cutter endest, its not hard for these people to become nihillists . musings from characters such as kruppe, baruk, harllo, snell, and many others give completely different outlooks.

[blewin]

perhaps the reason I found Harllo's plot so compelling to read is the lack of philosophising, but more the "show" of philosophising.

[phart]

Sinisdar Toste;352896 said:

i agree with the dawsons creek bit somewhat, most soldiers don't have a websters dictionary, yet they seem to have a vocabulary that baruk would envy.

for the other part though, i think that the points of view and philisophical stand points are pretty varied. in this book we had a lot of viewpoints from characters with layers and layers of sorrow on their shoulders. nimander, murillio, cutter endest, its not hard for these people to become nihillists . musings from characters such as kruppe, baruk, harllo, snell, and many others give completely different outlooks.

I don't think the philosphy is varied at all but we'll agree to disagree as i dont have my books with me (in ireland for wedding) to evidence my thoughts.

What different outlooks would you ascribe to the people you mentioned?

[phart]

caladanbrood;352630 said:

Even if all individuals think something is stupid, a group made up of those individuals could well end up doing it.

Can you give me an example in real life where this has happened, i can't think of one, the nuclear race was thought of as good by many people. I can't think of one situation where a group of people have abhorred a mind set as much as Karsa and then went on to replicate or realise that mind-set collectively.

[Sinisdar Toste]

well obviously kruppe is possesed of exreme confidence and his philosophy is "if it wont eat me, i'll eat it."

baruk, old as he may be doesn't succumb to despair, he may indulge it at times, but he is very clear headed and cognizant that if he has to, he will ensure that he is the last of the t'orrud cabal.

seerdomin, while a tragic figure, represents a different philosophical outlook as well. his self-loathing doesn't turn him into a whiny baby, but tempers him into a blade of pure justice. seerdomin is a lot like whiskeyjack i think.

look at bainisk, he believes that just over the hills there sits a paradise, and harllo, though he knows it isnt true understands the gift he is giving his friend. snell and sirryn kanar of lether could be the same person. cowardly and self-important, they believe the world exists to satisfy them.

there is plenty of other examples.. samar dev, a woman mired in a love she wont admit, rallick wrapped in so many hard layers, he doesn't feel them anymore, gorlas was a great believer in himself and the apparatus that supported him. im sorry but i just cant countenance all this generalizing. obviously the overall tone of the book was one of futility and tragedy (the whole damn series is) but it also sheds hope and even joy, when mother dark said "anomander, my son" i nearly broke down

and @ your second post, if you take out the 'all' part of broods statement, it makes a lot more sense, cuz all individuals never agree that one thing is stupid