[Aptorian]

Threads can go two ways

They can fade out, dissipate if you will. People lose interest, everyone agrees how ever unlikely that sounds, and the thread simply loses interest.

Or through eventual degredation they can colapse in upon themselves, spiralling into a vortex off angry flames and serious trolling.

We tread a thin line

[wolverine]

blackzoid, on Apr 16 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Wry, on Apr 16 2009, 06:44 PM, said:

blackzoid, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 PM, said:

Wry, on Apr 12 2009, 11:56 PM, said:

And to everyone who holds up Erickson as an argument as to how it should be done... well just look at the dropping standard in the last few books for an explanation as to why most authors don't do a book in a year.

OT

You know, I'm real tired of that argument been trotted out against Erikson.
Can people please in the future put a disclaimer in front of statements like that, to say that it is their opinion only and NOT an objective fact that the last "few" (I assume you mean last 3?) books were of lower quality.
Because I loved TBH and TTH and was only mildly disappointed with RG. In my opinion, TTH was up there with MOI and the siege of Y'ghatan was the best scene in the entire series.

On topic you forget that GoTM, DG,MOI and HOC were all published on consecutive years. So it was possible for Erikson to work on a tight schedule for his "better" books.
However, I don't expect Martin to have to do this. He can proceed at his own pace. I'm used to Dark Tower waits after all.

And really what was wrong with A Feast for Crows? I liked that book. It broadened the story. Maybe it's because I read all the ASOFAI books in one go, but I saw no dip in quality.

So i should qualify any negative post i make about Erikson by saying it's just my opinion? How about you just asume i'm expressing my opinion when ever i post unless i start referencing scientific studies about how mule POVs vastly improve reading experiences?

How can a comment on writing standard be anything but subjective anyway?

And i note you didn't apply the same disclaimer when it's your opinion and it's positive about SE.


I feel better now, this is good. i think we're bonding

You are absolutely right! We are bonding.
And did you notice that I didn't put any disclaimer about it being my opinion when I expressed positive feelings about Martin's latest as well?
Yet you didn't rip me on that. Why not? Martin gets the pass but Erikson doesn't?

As for what I said about Erikson....

"Because I loved TBH and TTH and was only mildly disappointed with RG. In my opinion, TTH was up there with MOI and the siege of Y'ghatan was the best scene in the entire series."

I think thats obvious that thats all my opinion only. the words " I loved" and "In my opinion" would kidna give someone the impression that I was speaking in a subjective fashion.


My problem with your original statement was that it seemed to me, the phrase "...dropping standard in the last few books for an explanation as to why most authors don't do a book in a year" seemed (in my opinion) to go from the area of subjective opinion to objective reality. Perhaps I read too much into it, but it implied (to me) that you were analysing the standard of Erikson's work in some sort of professional manner. Something like using a correlation of reviews from critics or something. A lot of people seem to be assuming (here and on Westros) that everyone agrees that the last 3-4 Erikson books were bad. Perhaps I acted in a knee-jerk fashion in trying to correct that.
No need for any scientific studies on how mule POV increases the reading experience. Everyone takes that as a given anyway.

Don't worry blackzoid tends to think everyone is purporting that their statements are facts unless they qualify them somehow. Where as most people assume posts are the posters opinion unless otherwise noted.

[Morgoth]

wolverine, on Apr 17 2009, 07:23 PM, said:

Grief, on Apr 16 2009, 05:01 PM, said:

Actually, there isn't a general consensus about that on the forum.
Poll:

1. Memories of Ice
2. Deadhouse Gates
3. Midnight Tides
4. The Bonehunters
5. Toll the Hounds
6. Reaper's Gale
7. Gardens of the Moon
8. House of Chains

Source:

http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...t=0&start=0

Sorry to debunk your stats but most of the people who voted in that thread are die hards with thousands of posts on this forum. My point, I don't think that even remotely accurately reflects the average readers opinion.

whereas your claim, lacking even something as limited as a small poll, should be taken as gold?

[blackzoid]

wolverine, on Apr 17 2009, 07:32 PM, said:

blackzoid, on Apr 16 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

Wry, on Apr 16 2009, 06:44 PM, said:

blackzoid, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 PM, said:

Wry, on Apr 12 2009, 11:56 PM, said:

And to everyone who holds up Erickson as an argument as to how it should be done... well just look at the dropping standard in the last few books for an explanation as to why most authors don't do a book in a year.

OT

You know, I'm real tired of that argument been trotted out against Erikson.
Can people please in the future put a disclaimer in front of statements like that, to say that it is their opinion only and NOT an objective fact that the last "few" (I assume you mean last 3?) books were of lower quality.
Because I loved TBH and TTH and was only mildly disappointed with RG. In my opinion, TTH was up there with MOI and the siege of Y'ghatan was the best scene in the entire series.

On topic you forget that GoTM, DG,MOI and HOC were all published on consecutive years. So it was possible for Erikson to work on a tight schedule for his "better" books.
However, I don't expect Martin to have to do this. He can proceed at his own pace. I'm used to Dark Tower waits after all.

And really what was wrong with A Feast for Crows? I liked that book. It broadened the story. Maybe it's because I read all the ASOFAI books in one go, but I saw no dip in quality.

So i should qualify any negative post i make about Erikson by saying it's just my opinion? How about you just asume i'm expressing my opinion when ever i post unless i start referencing scientific studies about how mule POVs vastly improve reading experiences?

How can a comment on writing standard be anything but subjective anyway?

And i note you didn't apply the same disclaimer when it's your opinion and it's positive about SE.


I feel better now, this is good. i think we're bonding

You are absolutely right! We are bonding.
And did you notice that I didn't put any disclaimer about it being my opinion when I expressed positive feelings about Martin's latest as well?
Yet you didn't rip me on that. Why not? Martin gets the pass but Erikson doesn't?

As for what I said about Erikson....

"Because I loved TBH and TTH and was only mildly disappointed with RG. In my opinion, TTH was up there with MOI and the siege of Y'ghatan was the best scene in the entire series."

I think thats obvious that thats all my opinion only. the words " I loved" and "In my opinion" would kidna give someone the impression that I was speaking in a subjective fashion.


My problem with your original statement was that it seemed to me, the phrase "...dropping standard in the last few books for an explanation as to why most authors don't do a book in a year" seemed (in my opinion) to go from the area of subjective opinion to objective reality. Perhaps I read too much into it, but it implied (to me) that you were analysing the standard of Erikson's work in some sort of professional manner. Something like using a correlation of reviews from critics or something. A lot of people seem to be assuming (here and on Westros) that everyone agrees that the last 3-4 Erikson books were bad. Perhaps I acted in a knee-jerk fashion in trying to correct that.
No need for any scientific studies on how mule POV increases the reading experience. Everyone takes that as a given anyway.

Don't worry blackzoid tends to think everyone is purporting that their statements are facts unless they qualify them somehow. Where as most people assume posts are the posters opinion unless otherwise noted.

Yes I tend to think a lot of things. Based on one objection from me on one point you have extrapolated my entire posting mindset. Well done on that.
Bit of an over generalisation to be sure and quite hostile in tone but its all good.

As a direct refrain I could add that most people would not assume that polls made by the posters on message boards have absolutely no basis in reality and should be summarily excluded on the basis of being inconvienient. Its not scientific fact, but its better then nothing.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 17 April 2009 - 10:59 PM

[Yellow]

House of Chains was my favourite when I re-read 1-5.

[wolverine]

Morgoth, on Apr 17 2009, 05:11 PM, said:

wolverine, on Apr 17 2009, 07:23 PM, said:

Grief, on Apr 16 2009, 05:01 PM, said:

Actually, there isn't a general consensus about that on the forum.
Poll:

1. Memories of Ice
2. Deadhouse Gates
3. Midnight Tides
4. The Bonehunters
5. Toll the Hounds
6. Reaper's Gale
7. Gardens of the Moon
8. House of Chains

Source:

http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...t=0&start=0

Sorry to debunk your stats but most of the people who voted in that thread are die hards with thousands of posts on this forum. My point, I don't think that even remotely accurately reflects the average readers opinion.

whereas your claim, lacking even something as limited as a small poll, should be taken as gold?

No, I thought it should be taken as my opinion reflecting on the statistics gathered from the actual poll. People can interpret and contemplate my opinion as they wish (just like the poll!).

Quote

Based on one objection from me on one point you have extrapolated my entire posting mindset. Well done on that.
Bit of an over generalisation to be sure and quite hostile in tone but its all good.

I have come into contact with your posts twice on this board ever, and both times you have felt the need to point out that people are expressing their opinions, not fact, which is obvious to most. Seeming to imply that your posts are facts, unless qualified (could be misinterpretation by me there).

EDIT: Sorry I jumped to conclusions with my only two experiences of your posting. But in both situations I encountered very arrogant responses to mine and others simple opinions, it is sometimes difficult to accurately portray your attitude on a message board though.

Quote

As a direct refrain I could add that most people would not assume that polls made by the posters on message boards have absolutely no basis in reality and should be summarily excluded on the basis of being inconvienient. Its not scientific fact, but its better then nothing.

Notice in my post above I said "I think!" Just for you! I qualified it as just my opinion and nothing more.

blackzoid, on Apr 16 2009, 12:10 PM, said:

Wry, on Apr 12 2009, 11:56 PM, said:

And to everyone who holds up Erickson as an argument as to how it should be done... well just look at the dropping standard in the last few books for an explanation as to why most authors don't do a book in a year.

OT

You know, I'm real tired of that argument been trotted out against Erikson.
Can people please in the future put a disclaimer in front of statements like that, to say that it is their opinion only and NOT an objective fact that the last "few" (I assume you mean last 3?) books were of lower quality.
Because I loved TBH and TTH and was only mildly disappointed with RG. In my opinion, TTH was up there with MOI and the siege of Y'ghatan was the best scene in the entire series.

On topic you forget that GoTM, DG,MOI and HOC were all published on consecutive years. So it was possible for Erikson to work on a tight schedule for his "better" books.
However, I don't expect Martin to have to do this. He can proceed at his own pace. I'm used to Dark Tower waits after all.

And really what was wrong with A Feast for Crows? I liked that book. It broadened the story. Maybe it's because I read all the ASOFAI books in one go, but I saw no dip in quality.

Just wanted to say I agree with a lot of what you say above. Y'Ghatan was awesome! I really enjoyed TBH and RG (just not so much with TTH). I can't say I did not like or enjoy AFFC, but in comparison to the other books in the series, it was a letdown for me. I think the quality of the writing and characters stayed the same, but the plot really seemed to slow. Again, I still really liked the book, but the plot did not seem to progress much for 700 pages. There are differing opinions on the "quality" of a book, but I can see why some think AFFC was a dip compared to the first three.

Modedit: I merged your 4 posts into one. Double posting is bad, quadruple posting is just unnecessary.

Use the Edit function and the quote button if you need to reply to several different posts.

[blackzoid]

Thats a fair response I guess. Only quibble would be that I would say that I did not mean to be arrogent as such in my response on what is and isn't an opinion, but as I said before, the phrase "dropping standard" seemed to me to pass the line from subjective to almost objective-like. Maybe it was my being sensitive to that phrase with no qualifiers been put on it. I don't know.
I do try to put qualifiers on everything I post, unless its something quoted from a direct source and would be factual in nature.

One point on the poll was that when you originally used the words "debunking stats", that would imply to me that you were discrediting wrong factual results.In the absense of other results, it is the only thing we could go on. You said that most of the voters were people with thousands of posts, but while a lot of those people posted in the thread itself they could only vote once. I would say that that poll reflects quite closely the average reader's/average message-board member's opinion. But I do not have absolute proof to be sure and I guess it would be open to interpretation.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 20 April 2009 - 02:31 PM

[Werthead]

I'd just add purely anecdotal evidence that on many other message boards (SFF World, Wotmania, Westeros, SFX etc) there does seem to be a general feeling that Deadhouse Gates, Memories of Ice and Midnight Tides are the best books (and the first two way ahead of the last one). Pretty much everything else is the subject of fierce debate. Some people love Toll the Hounds, some people hate it and gave up on the series because of it. Some people felt Gardens of the Moon was a great start, others struggled with it and some gave up on it and moved onto DHG instead. Some people think ICE is as good as Erikson, others refuse to read him at all. And so on.

As I have said before, it is diffiult to find consensuses on Malazan. The only trend I can really identify is that the first few books are definitely much more universally enjoyed than the later ones.

[Aooga]

Werthead, on Apr 9 2009, 03:22 AM, said:

It's not really a case of I 'like him' (although his girlfriend is a friend of mine and I've swapped emails with GRRM a few times and met him once), it's more a case of extreme boredom that no-one can do their research.

Quote

- He is not writing a book from scratch. He just has to edit half a book that's already written. Even if it involves heavy re-writes how long would that take if, as he claims, he had the major part of it already done when writing AFFC?

Will people just let this go? He had some stuff for ADWD left over when he finished AFFC. He thought it was 1) not very good and 2) was not structurally sound for the book. If he'd published what he'd had then, we'd have had a book that was very short and utter pants. So that stuff got scrapped. It is gone. It is no more. It was deleted three years or more ago and a whole new book has been written almost from scratch (I think the first Daenerys chapter has maybe survived more or less intact, perhaps the first Tyrion one as well, although both have been rewritten; everything else is gone).

What is ridiculous is that ADWD isn't even the book that's taken the longest to write in the series. When it overtakes AFFC in a few months or AGoT in a year and a half I'll get more concerned.

Well that is news to me. Admit I did not do my research. But then again i'm not that frantic over the wait. Thanks for clarifying that.

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

Hmm. Thoughts. AFFC was not as bad as a lot of people say. A light letdown from the first books, but it's more a matter of it having different POVs from what people wanted to read, more than any real decline in the quality of the writing.

IMHO, Erikson is great, but does have flaws LIKE EVERY AUTHOR EVER. Particularly in the last three books. And, you people talk about him too much in a GRRM thread. I understand the connection and how SE was legitimately tied to the conversation, but it has moved into two separate discussions.

[Yellow]

Ah, this made me laugh.

http://grrrm.livejou....com/18930.html

[Blend]

Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Stark.

[Mirthmonkey]

As others have said, a big part of the problem here is that when book 4 of the series came out, George Martin said that it was the first half of a larger book that he'd already mostly written. It would only focus on half the characters and the second half would be out soon as ADWD. Four years later... nothing. That's understandably frustrating to readers who were eagerly anticipating the next book and yes, it's frustrating to be waiting for that book and see so many other projects apparently being given priority over it. That Martin doesn't seem to get that is surprising. I think sending angry e-mails to Martin about it is totally inappropriate, but it's not difficult to understand people being a bit frustrated.

In George Martin's defense, he is fully entitled to do whatever he wants, to take as long as he wants on the book, to do as many other projects as he likes, and even to never finish the series if he's so inclined. It's his life. He should enjoy it. There is no contract implicit in our buying and/or reading previous books that requires him to write the next one.

On the other hand, I am entitled to no longer give a damn about the series. I loved the first three books and thought the fourth one was alright. I was still eagerly awaiting book 5, but that was four years ago. I no longer remember much of what happened. It's been long enough that simply starting to read the next book won't bring the memories back very well. I guess I could reread them all if and when the next book finally arrives, but I almost never reread books, however good they are. Time is limited and there are too many other good books out there that are entirely new to me.

Do what you want, George. That's your right and you should be able to do it without being harassed by whining readers. But many readers will simply move on to other pursuits and lose interest. It's a trade-off.

[Tarcanus]

Blend, on Jun 1 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Stark.

Before I read this more closely, I thought it said, "Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Shark" and I started to think, 'that's pretty badass, actually'.

[Aptorian]

Tarcanus, on Jun 3 2009, 09:42 PM, said:

Blend, on Jun 1 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Stark.

Before I read this more closely, I thought it said, "Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Shark" and I started to think, 'that's pretty badass, actually'.

I admit that I lol'd a bit at this.

[Werthead]

Tarcanus, on Jun 3 2009, 08:42 PM, said:

Before I read this more closely, I thought it said, "Everytime someone asks when ADWD comes out, Martin kills a Shark" and I started to think, 'that's pretty badass, actually'.

Especially given the lack of sharks in New Mexico. It does possibly explain the delays on ADWD if every time someone asks this question (which I would estimate at 784 per day) he has to drive to the nearest stretch of ocean and go shark-hunting.

[Illuyankas]

Even if it was the less awesome, more literary version, it'll still cut down on the rubbish Starks (the ones that aren't Arya) and leave the best one (Arya)

Spoiler

who I happen to like mostly because it's proof that no matter how much I rag on GRRM in a hopefully joky-sounding fashion, at least he counts as another person who agrees with me that little girls are evil and will totally become assassins given half a chance

.

[caladanbrood]

Now wait. Ned is good because

Spoiler

he dies pretty quickly...

[Seraphina]

Arya is great but i do love Jon Snow (not teeeeechnically a Stark, i know)

as for how long it's taking him, on the one hand I'm getting ARGH! every time a deadline is moved again, but on the other; it IS his life. Authors don't have set work hours per day like normal jobs, hes entitled to do as much as he wants when he wants. so I'll keep getting annoyed, but I certainly won't forward my complaints to him.

[MecnunK]

Seraphina, on Jun 8 2009, 12:09 PM, said:

Arya is great but i do love Jon Snow (not teeeeechnically a Stark, i know)

as for how long it's taking him, on the one hand I'm getting ARGH! every time a deadline is moved again, but on the other; it IS his life. Authors don't have set work hours per day like normal jobs, hes entitled to do as much as he wants when he wants. so I'll keep getting annoyed, but I certainly won't forward my complaints to him.

I wont complain to him or send him emails etc. because I don't really care anymore but I did buy the first 4 books so the rest of you please feel free to send him abusive emails. I think authors have a moral responsibility to finish things they started especially if they have already reaped the financial rewards from 4 books, and other "projects" on the back of success from the afore mentioned series barring illness and things that are out of their control of course. Guess I was a gullible sucker for believing ADWD was already finished at the time of release of the very mediocre AFFC.