[Ganymed]

Ah, that actually makes a lot of sense to me. I'm inclined to agree.

[Sinisdar Toste]

thats one of the few criticisms i can sympathize with, some of the syntax i came across had my jaw hanging and me wondering if the editor had been nodding off while he was reading

[lfex]

And I can third that. I enjoyed the book, but some sentences were really in the WTF territory. A decent editor should be able to eliminate such things without much difficulty, but editing does seem to be a forgotten art these days.

[L'oric]

Angel, on Jan 28 2009, 01:57 AM, said:

Epiph, on Jan 28 2009, 06:44 AM, said:

It really isn't fair to compare such a sideline character to such a powerhouse. You're comparing apples to oranges. Comparing Kyle and Crokus is more accurate; both are typical "lvl 1" type characters whose only real differences are their proficiencies (a warrior vs a thief) and where they come from (the city vs the plains). And I don't even think that that is a problem...a "lvl 1" type character who has been developed enough by the author can be much more interesting than either Kyle or Crokus, and can be a very effective tool to explore themes of naivety and the leaching away of innocence, both powerful themes.

See... this point here to me is a joke. Everyone is comparing him to Crokus because he is human and young... thats all. But I'm not comparing on race, i'm comparing on the type of character which they are. And yes, Karsa started as a lowly character, sure he was strong and had some dust in him, but he developed throughout the series. He was developed in the first book, so you cannot even use the argument that he's had more book time. The only thing that stopped Kyle from being liked/developed was ICE himself. This is what SE does, he takes chars and develops them. ICE does not. Kyle doesn't develop, he doesn't respond and change with events. His personality, thoughts, feelings and emotions aren't in flux due to what he has been exposed to. He just watches, then sorta shrugs his shoulders. He is not being developed at all. And whilst Karsa may not have been the picture of innocence, he certainly is naive. So you tell me in defined terms why I can't compare them... I'm not seeing a problem, except for their different races.

I think Kyle gets just as much developement in one book as Crokus has in any one book. I think Ghelel gets developed. Sergeant Jumpy gets developed. Hurl gets developed. Possum, Laseen, Mallick, all have face time where motivations are exposed.

I have to say I find most of the critism on this book seems to me to be a fallacies. From people saying they could not even get halfway through it to a long list of problems that SE himself shares with the author. Is SE a better writer right now? Sure. His running Themes and characters are great, but its not like I do not have a serious problem with inane Kruppe ramblings and writer discourse on the state of society and human relation. "Thanks but can we get back to the story" is what I think 50 percent of the time. Give me the "human" condition sure but lets wax poetic on socialism or something similiar in "The economist"

Every book has problems, nothing is perfect. This is a good book. Bordering on great but for some lack of description (has been mentioned) some overrepitition (which has been mentioned.) All in all maybe he is not able to write a book a year. Maybe he is a book every 2 years.

Sincerely
L'oric

[HegemonWiggin]

In advance of Dust of Dreams, I decided to reread everything from Bonehunters on, including this... and then decided to see what some of the reactions were on this forum.

I read both this and Abyss' thread [http://www.malazanem...howtopic=11579], and agree with both, mostly.

Jumpy, Braven Tooth, Laseen, Tayschrenn, Kiska - they all worked quite wonderfully. The last three of those worked as sketches. Not entirely revealed, but you can infer their motives from their actions. Esslemont seems much more adept at writing about characters from another's perspective than internal thoughts. There's an edict in writing about showing rather than telling; when Esslemont just showed character's actions, they worked quite nicely. It's when he stepped inside someone's head that I felt that character go off the rails.

Both Kyle and Ghelel both seem to be weak stereotypes with little nuance in their character. Partly, this is because you see the world through their eyes. There's no mystery to them, no allure, they're actually as simple as they seem to be, unlike other characters who can appear innocent but their internal world is far richer. I don't think people are that simplistic.

With Kyle, I also had a problem with his becoming Soldier of Light. Why? What has he done to earn a spot in the House? Why would T'riss want him? Mostly, people seem to take on roles that they have proved to be good at. (e.g. Baudin, Gaz, Thordy, Whiskeyjack - presuming he was once Mason of Death, Pust, etc.) Their role in the house fit their character, they became that archetype. Perhaps the Soldier of Light has to be a wide-eyed innocent who can hold his own. But if that's the case, I would've expected at least some poignancy to surround such a deliberate utilization of innocence.

Other remarks I wholly agree with: Coots and Badlands are entirely indistinguishable. The Old Guard was generally poorly done. Toc the Elder's entrance was quite stirring, and ratcheted my expectations higher. All for... in the end, nothing. What was the best moment with Urko? When Shimmer discovers the corpses of Avowed with the base of a hand driven through their skull, and then infers where he is. i.e. when he's not actually on screen.

There was a big plot problem with the Old Guard; they'd been built into a legend by Erikson for his readers, and I probably would've preferred them to remain legends, with all the power that is associated with the word "legendary". It may well have been impossible for the Old Guard to meet those expectations; inevitably, if we found out the whole truths of the Emperor's rise, the Old Guard would end up being less wonderful as they've been imagined into. (i.e. they never were as good as we wished and so actually revealing them now is bound to be less than we'd wish even without their inevitable decline).

HOWEVER, if the Old Guard had to be so thoroughly decimated, I would at least expect some emotional impact. Someone else mentioned that the book was crying loudly for some reunions between them and some glimpses of why they were legends in the first place. The entire idea of the Talian league just annoyed me; the motives of the Old Guard for creating it, leading it, etc. seemed like an excuse to get two armies onto the field for an epic battle scene, as opposed to character-driven necessity. For Toc the Elder, I understand aligning with the other once everything had gone to hell, but why did Choss and Ameron create it? What was their objective? Characters that have wielded sucsh power, that know the horrors of war; they wouldn't do such a thing unless they thought it necessary.

Lastly with regard to the Old Guard: if the explanation for their rather abysmal failure is that time has passed them by and they really are the past, not the future, then I would expect it to be more brutal. I want to feel their /their soldier's despair as they realize these legends are really mortal men, flawed and this time, doomed to unredeemable failure. I'd want to hear someone's PoV who senses the utter waste of brilliance, the destruction of greatness; someone to witness, someone who knew them and still survives. If Dassem had been there the whole time, it could've been him. Perhaps Temper's perspective would've worked [though I have my scepticism about his PoV in NoK].

The Ereko storyline was mostly fine. I didn't find it especially engaging, but it was acceptable. His death could've been far more interesting if you had some sense that it was necessary. There's emotional power in the clash between individual desires and cosmic inevitability. Esslemont tried to tap that with Kyle, but he didn't do that particularly well; before the actual death scene, we had no indication that this part of the storyline was inevitable because of past events. Hood being killed by Rake, Rake being killed by Ultor: those had the sense of something that must occur, that there was no option but for it to occur. This did not. We were 'told' that it did, but we were not 'shown'. Kyle's reaction after his death was so... unsubtle that it completely lost the chance for emotional impact. Rather than hear Kyle's rather slow-witted thought-process, I want to see him act out in rage against Kallor, against Dassem, I want to see Dassem cool it, see the slow realization. Getting it directly from his perspective ruined the emotional impact for me.

I think this is sufficiently long for now.

PS: Agreed on the names thing.
PPS: Also agreed that Coots and Badlands do not have any character of their own.

[Dolorous Menhir]

Excellent reply, Hegemon.

To add a new spin to this debate - does anyone believe that Esslemont's next book will be better? I do not. We can all agree that this book was a step down from the main series, I would argue this is because of ICE's limits as a writer, not his lack of experience.

[Illuyankas]

I'm willing to wait and see. The man's done a novella and an average novel, there's still room for improvement.

[MTS]

I'm with Illy on this one, and am being more optimistic. I'm not willing to write him off yet, but given time to hone his craft, I think it will be a better novel.

[Pig Iron]

Hm, I thought both NOK and ROTCG were great fun. SE writes more stylish prose for sure, but sometimes almost to the point where it becomes a liabilty as it verges on overdone here and there (*ducks*). The man must be allowed to experiment though.

[Use Of Weapons]

With time, ICE may become as sensitive to the language he employs as SE already is. But he's starting from way back, and I don't think he'll ever close the gap. After all, SE is improving also.

So it's unfair to compare them. What ICE has written is competent -- on a par with Feist, or Brooks, perhaps.

[lord of tragedy]

brooks maybe, feist no. its hard to be objective with ICE. he can't be compared with erikson because erikson is truly exceptional, a fantasy writer with a gift of language every bit as powerful as his ideas. he even plays with the tropes of fantasy, its mores, its conventions, its limitations. and yet we can really only define ICE through erikson because he writes in the malaz world.

to be frank ROTCG WAS SHITE. so much material and potential produced so poor results. but i loved NOK. it was claustraphobic, a riveting depiction of the heaving ancient powers of malaz city. i'm hoping his problem is scope, and that maybe the next book will be tighter and more unified around a time, theme and place.

[Dolorous Menhir]

lord of tragedy, on Jun 4 2009, 11:51 PM, said:

to be frank ROTCG WAS SHITE. so much material and potential produced so poor results. but i loved NOK

Love the frankness. I agree.

I suppose there's a good example to highlight the difference between NoK and RotCG. I still remember well many scenes from the first book, in particular the parts involving Temper's advance through Mock's Hold, viewed from both his and Kiska's perspective. That was good stuff.

As for RotCG, well, it's been a few months, and frankly I can barely remember what happened. I reread this thread earlier, and I've got no recollection of who most of the characters discussed were, or most of the things that happened. As lord of tragedy said, it was no good.

[teholbeddict]

Dolorous Menhir, on Jun 4 2009, 06:35 PM, said:

lord of tragedy, on Jun 4 2009, 11:51 PM, said:

to be frank ROTCG WAS SHITE. so much material and potential produced so poor results. but i loved NOK

Love the frankness. I agree.

I suppose there's a good example to highlight the difference between NoK and RotCG. I still remember well many scenes from the first book, in particular the parts involving Temper's advance through Mock's Hold, viewed from both his and Kiska's perspective. That was good stuff.

As for RotCG, well, it's been a few months, and frankly I can barely remember what happened. I reread this thread earlier, and I've got no recollection of who most of the characters discussed were, or most of the things that happened. As lord of tragedy said, it was no good.

I'm with the two of you on this one. In fact I am dreading the next book as it deals with Darujhistan, which happens to be one of my favourite story lines, as well as having some of my favourite characters. ROTCG was a let down in so many respects for me and I am worried the next book will produce much of the same. I will read it, but I don't have high hopes for it. I am really thankfull ROTCG wasn't the first malaz book I read, because if it was, I never would have picked up another. I took very little from ROTCG other than confusion and questions and not in a good way. As MTS stated for the length of the book, and material incolved the results were very poor. There was just too much going on, a lot of it unecessary and nothing was ever developed properly. Character's who had been built up to mythical proportions by SE were absolutely ruined for me by ICE when they finally made their appearance. I thought NoK was good, not great but definitely good. I was hoping ROTCG was going to better, especially as he was working with a higher page count. Sadly that was not the case.

[MTS]

Well the next book is Stonewielder, which deals with Korel and the Stormriders, so you have a fair wait for the Darujhistan novel.

I understand the harsh reaction to the novel, however I think it's a little too harsh. Like Illy said, the man's experience is a novella and one epic-in-scope novel - I think you're lacking a little faith here. Now sure, GotM was pretty good and quite epic as well, but let's face it, ICE is not SE. He's said so himself. Now, perhaps some of the bits in ROTCG were unnecessary and his ambitions didn't quite match the results, but considering he reads the forums occasionally, he would pick up on our criticisms, and the criticisms of his ARC readers and editors, and hopefully hone his craft with a more compact novel, since that seems to be more his forte. I think it's unfair to call the man a shit writer because of one novel.

[Aptorian]

Just for the record, GotM was AWESOME. Personally it is one of my favorite books in the series, it was what got me hooked, with the crazy slaughter of the Hounds of Shadow, the Description of the battle at Pale, Raest, ANomander Rake, A crazy puppet, etc. And the writting was tight. Every storyline moved the plot forward and there weren't any strings that didn't connect, or characters that didn't serve a purpose, you cannot say the same of RCG. It was just a sloppy book.

I liked RCG in that the plots and stories and characters were interesting, but it was all poorly handled. I'll still buy all that he writes because I have hope and I love the Malazan world, which Esslemont at least has a good understanding off.

[teholbeddict]

I will agree with Apt on GoTM it is actually my favourite book of the series, although I know others would disagree. In the case of ICE, I do take the lack of experience into consideration, but it's not really a good enough excuse. In fact I thought there should have been an improvement in his writing from NoK to ROTCG as he now had more experience, but for me it just wasn't there.

This post has been edited by teholbeddict: 09 June 2009 - 01:25 AM

[bobbo]

First of all I'm glad to see this thread and have to agree with a lot of the things which have been said about ICE's writting and RotCG as a whole...

That said I actually liked NoK and thought that it was a better take on the Malazan story than RotCG.

Question: does any1 else think that ICE should maybe stick to the novellas, highlighting some of the mysteries of SE's series, with only a few main characters -- rather than diving head first into the larger malazan world of SE's writting?

I kinda liked reading NoK from just 2 characters POV's (Kiska and Temper). I thought it really set ICE apart from SE which was kinda what I was looking for.

Oh yeah and GotM was indeed awesome... althought MoI would have to come before it in sheer KA-POW!! factor.

*Edit
Whoops just read MTS's post basically what I said only more eloquently put than I ever could.

This post has been edited by bobbo: 12 June 2009 - 07:43 PM

[Fist Gamet]

I know it's been said, and it is inevitable, but I really don't think it is fair to draw comparisons between SE and ICE. Of course, they invite it quite openly by sharing their world and stories, but I think I probably got a lot more out of RoTCG by making the conscious effort to avoid comparisons.
On the one hand, I did not enjoy MT or TTH half as much as I did RoTCG, but even that is probably an unfair comparison as ICE has the advantage of being able to tell parts of a story with the groundwork and interest already done by SE, and it seems to me there is such a huge amount of history, sidestory and backstory left unwritten by SE that ICE can almost pick and choose the most interesting and cool stuff to cover.

I really liked RoTCG, I enjoyed the action and many of the characters. It is inevitable that ICE will put a different slant on some of the characters, and perhaps so much so that we might feel it's inconsistent with previous writing, but I agree that ICE has to be allowed to do this. As a writer, I just don't think you can write about some other writer's characters and be constrained by how you think they might do it. This is a problem I am certain SE and ICE have long since come to terms with.

Essentially, I know how much I enjoyed RoTCG, and much of that was probably down to not thinking too much about how it fits (or doesn't fit) into my current views and knowledge of the world. Yes, some of it was clumsy and could have been better, and yes, ICE has a problem with making me give a toss about some of the characters, but I would still regard him as a good writer. One who, I would imagine, will only get better.

[wert]

Apart from many things already mentioned, I disliked that Kyle was named Kyle. So far all the names were weird and unusual (sometimes they made you think how to pronounce them), and were not associated with the world we live in, and then there's Kyle. I had trouble imagining a Kyle in the Malazan world.

[AlanH]

I read RotCG and NoK recently, and if it wasn't for the extra knowledge which might help in SE's works, I wouldn't have finished either of them.

Awful work by the editor aside, I think the writing - not the story line - was dire. Really really bad. He may have created some of the world, but that doesn't mean he can write as well as his friend and co-creator. I think the worst thing was the dialogue - there were bits that you just can't imagine people saying.

Some compare it to GotM, but even though this wasn't SE's best, it still showed quality writing. This shows none. I really tried to like it, but I just can't. I shall sadly not be investing any more of my money in ICE's novels. And although it is tempting simply for info for SE's series, I just think to myself "if this was a brand new series that I'd never heard of before, would I pay money for the next novel?" The answer is a definite no.