[George Awesome]

H.D., on 27 January 2010 - 01:46 AM, said:

Sorry. You have admitted you want it spoon-fed if you can have it that way. Let's just be blunt:

You aren't going to like this series. It only gets WORSE from DG with plot inter-weavings, unexplained mysteries, extreme intricacies (with required re-readings to pick up on your own, and yes we're damned proud to love a series that takes a hell of a lot of thought) and a time-line that is fubarred. If you can't disassociate your problems with the books from your enjoyment this early in the series, it will never happen.

Well, spoonfed was a joke - and while I'm glad you're proud, rereading fiction isn't the only way to think.

[D'rek]

Cobbles, on 27 January 2010 - 12:58 AM, said:

Epiph, on 26 January 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:

Personally, I find Deadhouse Gates the hardest read of the Malazan books, even on reread. I may have had more trouble with the first 50 pages of GotM, and I may have been less engaged by Midnight Tides on my first read-through, but DhG was hard for me on my first read because I was bewildered by the Path of Hands and Tremelor and Felisin's story was emotionally hard to read, and it was torturous on my second because I knew what was coming (...in a good way, if that makes sense). I also found it stylistically harder. I remember one particular passage describing Pust's abode that I had to read over several times because the description was so weird (as an aside, I think this might be why people often complain about Erikson's lack description: it may be there, but it's so dense, it can slip right past you if you're not paying attention).

I would say that comparing Erikson to Wallace is pretty right on, because I think Erikson is not aspiring to write another fantasy book, he is aspiring to write literature that happens o be fantasy. His level efficacy is up for debate. I, personally, think he comes close, but that the scope of the entire series of the MBotF hampers this aspiration.

As for the gruesomeness, I agree with you, and, while I think it's necessary to show the brutality of the Whirlwind, I think other instances of it elsewhere in the series are maybe a little much. This doesn't really get better, for the record.

I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of warren magic. Hell, I'm not totally sure I understand it, but I like that Erikson's system of magic is not a cut and dry system of rules. It's magic, so it lacks a certain amount of logic. Someone has already mentioned that this isn't Baldur's Gate--mages are relatively rare, and the way magic works in the Malazan world lends itself more to the scholastic or, in rarer instances, power minded than the mercantile-minded, and many of those who were merchants were culled by the Empire, as mentioned in the prologue of Gardens of the Moon.

It's been well addressed, but just because there actually are "supernatural" things happening in the Malazan world doesn't mean that they don't deserve to be called "supernatural". These are not normal, everyday events. I do, however, see your point that Erikson sometimes doesn't do a fantastic job achieving what he sets out to do (your example of Felisin's Stockholm Syndrome is a good one). I would argue that this gets better as we become more familiar with the Malazan world and as Erikson grows as a writer, respectively.

The pay off is there at the end, which is amazing. I'd say by the end of Deadhouse Gates, you have a basic understanding of the Malazan world, so things like Soletaken and D'ivers and Azath don't blindside you. Memories of Ice was like a walk in the park and remains one of my absolute favorites. This is not to say that basic plot points are answered. Cobbles referenced something weird that happens to Felison, Heboric, and Baudin, and if it's what I think it is, we're still not totally clear on what happened, one book shy of the end of the series. But it's still an important plot point. Not to mention that there are whole story lines that Erikson has abandoned, to be picked up by ICE.

As for your specific complaints:
RE Pale and the Moranth: they're humans in insectoid armor. They allied with the Malazans on a promise that they could take revenge on Pale. The brutal Malazan Empire, not wanting to lose a valuable ally and being masters of spin, held up their end of the bargain.
RE Kalam just wandering past Membra: Fiddler describes how Kalam has been gone a lot, gathering info and stuff. I would assume he was figuring out how to get the book so he could get safe passage through Raraku. It was not random, it was planned.
RE Whirlwind Goddess/Sha'ik: her plan to conduct the starting ceremony on the open play with just two fighty-guys at her side would have worked if the chick Red Blade, Lostara Yil, wasn't as talented as she is. Lostara was the one that was able to keep tracking Kalam (whose past experiences led him to believe that a native of Seven Cities isn't going to be followed by unsavory elements, and so didn't try to hide himself--certainly a mistake, but one that anyone with an overabundance of confidence could make), not the other Red Blades, and some of her badassness is explained in...maybe House of Chains, definitely Bonehunters.
RE the bodyguards: Unless the Red Blades killed the guards before Sha'ik, who was their most important target, I highly doubt they would have succeeded, as the first quarter of House of Chains will illuminate. And yes, there is more to the apparent ease with which it occurred that will become clear later in this book.
RE the bloodflies: I don't think it's common for bloodflies to swarm. My understanding was that they were swarming because of all the fires and stuff that were happening because of the Rebellion, which would explain why it happened so conveniently on that particular night. Maybe I misread it, though.

I seem to remember that Mebra told Kalam to do a certain ritual each evening. Wasn't it that ritual which helped Lostara track him in the first place?

The thing I referred to (I try to be as obscure as possible to not spoil anything) was the object sticking out of the sand and the part where they journeyed over a body of water.

If you really, really, really want answers that badly and don't care whatsoever about spoilers (you may be sorry!!!):

Spoiler

Mebra was corrupt. He had Kalam do that ritual fully knowing the red blades would track him by it (probably explained to the red blades how to do it). The rest of Mebra is RAFO in HoC/tBH.

[HoosierDaddy]

Quote

Quote

I'm a bit grumpy right now, so take this a bit lighter than it may come off: Do you want the books spoonfed to you?

If possible. SE seems to keep introducing new things, and the end of GotM saw a bunch of those things converge in an extended sequence set in a fixed, sequential time period: if the series clicks into that gear and stays there, I'd like it.

Yep. That certainly reads like a joke. And, everyone in this thread has told you that SE will keep introducing new things, and it won't be set in a fixed sequential time period.

Why else piss around? I'm trying to be blunt and not have you waste your time.

Rereading fiction is the only way to think? Fantastic interpretative skills there. I said we were proud to be interested in a series that was complicated enough that it required re-reads to begin to FULLY comprehend what SE is putting together. Not that "rereading something" is the only way to "think" (that's a pretty damned attenuated link there as well, but whatever). You cite Sanderson. I love Brandon, but his fantasy is simple, and he does spoonfeed, so forgive me if your examples only illustrate the lack of your "joking."

But, then again, you've read one and a quarter of the books, you certainly know what you are talking about.

This post has been edited by H.D.: 27 January 2010 - 04:42 AM

[blackzoid]

George Awesome, on 27 January 2010 - 04:29 AM, said:

H.D., on 27 January 2010 - 01:46 AM, said:

Sorry. You have admitted you want it spoon-fed if you can have it that way. Let's just be blunt:

You aren't going to like this series. It only gets WORSE from DG with plot inter-weavings, unexplained mysteries, extreme intricacies (with required re-readings to pick up on your own, and yes we're damned proud to love a series that takes a hell of a lot of thought) and a time-line that is fubarred. If you can't disassociate your problems with the books from your enjoyment this early in the series, it will never happen.

Well, spoonfed was a joke - and while I'm glad you're proud, rereading fiction isn't the only way to think.

NO, NO, NO.
George, its as simple as this: You will HAVE to reread this series at least once. There is no way around this.
If you want a lot of the answers, thats the way to do it. One of the greatest pleasures is going back and re-reading the earlier books taking information that was learned about the world in the later books, and saying to onself "Aha! Thats what was actually going on there!"

A reread of the entire series can change ones opinion of some of the books. (I hated the 4th book the first time around, now its my second-favourite, all because of the second look at it.) And its not just Erikson, I'm half-way through a re-read of a Song of Fire and Ice right now and that is also benefiting from the second look. Some books require more than one read.

If you don't like rereading fiction, than walk away. Walk away right now. No point wasting your time.

But don't tell us that you have never re-watched Memento or any Tarantino film and seeing how the ending ties into the clues given throughout the earlier parts of the film. Nolan's Prestige is alot like that too. And I'm almost certain that that film requires 2 screenings.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 27 January 2010 - 06:03 AM

[George Awesome]

blackzoid, on 27 January 2010 - 05:59 AM, said:

But don't tell us that you have never re-watched Memento or any Tarantino film and seeing how the ending ties into the clues given throughout the earlier parts of the film.

I haven't seen Memento or Prestige twice, actually, but I'd draw two distinctions: 1) they *can* be understood/involving during the first viewing - the second viewing *changes* the interpretation, but you do have one the first time through - not just shruggable questions (well, that's what I've got, anyway - see next post, specifically "dog with a card trick" [and again, that's a Bill Hicks quote]), and 2) they're only a couple of hours, not multiple volumes.

I have no intention of *re*reading anything, though, so I am thankful for the heads up.

And HD: you're right, I could have been clearer: I should have said that I *thought* my idea of "spoonfed" was sarcastically broad, but maybe not by MbotF standards: and the type of thought involving thousands of pages of fiction not even theoretically comprehensible on the first read through is not for me.

This post has been edited by George Awesome: 27 January 2010 - 06:23 AM

[George Awesome]

Reply to Epiph: white text is him, red is me:

I would say that comparing Erikson to Wallace is pretty right on, because I think Erikson is not aspiring to write another fantasy book, he is aspiring to write literature that happens o be fantasy. His level efficacy is up for debate. I, personally, think he comes close, but that the scope of the entire series of the MBotF hampers this aspiration.

I was comparing patience requirements more than anything. I wouldn't apply any of the complaints I've raised here to DFW, except that his stuff's almost too depressing to read now that he's gone.

It's magic, so it lacks a certain amount of logic.

Mistborn's magic system was good: it was just a circumscribed new set of physical laws, not a method of rescinding them. And as I recall, Winter of the World's was tied to blacksmithing: the rules are laid out and followed.

RE Kalam just wandering past Membra: Fiddler describes how Kalam has been gone a lot, gathering info and stuff. ***I would assume*** he was figuring out how to get the book so he could get safe passage through Raraku. It was not random, it was planned.

Well, let's look it up.

Chapter two: Kalam finding the book on Mebra: "(Kalam) crouched and collected the object that Mebra had dropped earlier (...) (Kalam) found himself holding a muslin-wrapped book (...) 'Hood's breath!' he whispered (...) 'does Pormqual know of the theft of that which is to unleash the Apocalypse?' (...)"

Chapter three, Crokus and Fiddler after Kalam leaves with the book: "(Crokus) 'So it wasn't part of the plan, then, Kalam going off on his own?' (Fiddler) 'Old blood calls, lad (...) Kalam wants to be at the heart of things (...) This time, the chance literally fell into his lap.'"

(Strictly speaking, it fell on the ground.)

Chapter Five: Kalam, thinking to himself after giving the book to Sha'ik: "He had delivered the Book, personally seen to the rise of the Whirlwind. Answered his blood's call, no matter how stained the motivation. The demands of his other life lay ahead. He would kill the Empress, to save the Empire. If he succeeded, Sha'ik's rebellion was doomed. Control would be restored. (italics) And if I fail they will bleed each other to exhaustion (/italics) (...) It was not a far reach, then, for Kalam to see in his shadow a hundred thousand deaths (...) (italics) Queen's blessing, it's done. (/italics)

So, first off: I grant that it may turn out that you're right about Kalam's having planned to find the book, but the writing doesn't seem ambiguous enough to allow an about face like that - even if that's what SE presents ("retcons?") as having been the case later on.
Second off: okay, maybe RAFOs will come along later and dismantle all of this in favour of a new interpretation - but it looks to me very much like Kalam is arbitrarily causing massive, horrible events because ... uh, he grew up in the area known for them?

I'm guessing SE was going for "conflicted loyalties, blood vs empire, epic scope," but it's not working for me: I just see "irrational, pompous, self-important ass murdering thousands based on impulse and coincidence."

Seriously, Kalam - pull it together. Nothing you're doing makes any sense. You like being in the centre of the action, and you were born in an area enthusiastic about mass murder? That's crazy. If Kalam fed your kids drain cleaner because it was made in his home town ("Ajax's blessing, it's done"), would you want to read a book about his life in prison? *Screw* him.

And what about the toothy gremlin leaving Crokus, coming back, and leaving again? If it were my gremlin, I would conclude that it was just half-wild and would always come back - but Crokus seems gloomiest after it leaves for the second time, and Fiddler says he has a feeling they wouldn't see it again. A feeling based on *what*, other than his telepathic pipeline to the author?

It's not a plot inconsistency, it's just me not being on the same page as the characters: I'm put back into "dog being shown a card trick" mode: I find reading about characters I don't like doing things that don't make sense for reasons I don't know under a system of rules that hasn't been explained to be very similar to *not* reading a book - or similar to reading someone's notes about a book they might like to write, or a book that they're currently reading but not understanding.

Ah. I don't know what I'm doing here anymore. I don't want to argue or piss anyone off or stop them from liking the book. Thanks if you commented to help me understand my stance on the book, it's been interesting and clarifying.

This post has been edited by George Awesome: 27 January 2010 - 06:47 AM

[HoosierDaddy]

You seem like a smart guy, George. And, obviously a critical reader. The Malazan Book of the Fallen might not be your cup of tea, but we talk about quite a few other series here as well. If you follow Abyss' advice and get to that part, and decide to finish, well at least you tried. The "Other Literature" section is quite diverse in other authors or series to read.

[Bonesaw85]

If you're only a third through the second book and you actually feel like you've made a big investment in remembering places and names and such....... It's only going to get much harder for you. And if a re-read is out of the question I really think you should just cut your losses and call it quits on the Malazan Book of the Fallen.



It's a shame tho, this really is an amazing series.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

George Awesome, on 27 January 2010 - 06:21 AM, said:

And what about the toothy gremlin leaving Crokus, coming back, and leaving again? If it were my gremlin, I would conclude that it was just half-wild and would always come back - but Crokus seems gloomiest after it leaves for the second time, and Fiddler says he has a feeling they wouldn't see it again. A feeling based on *what*, other than his telepathic pipeline to the author?

Just wanted to address this point. If you continue reading this series don't take anything said or thought by characters as the Holy Scriptures. People lie, remember uncorectly or are just plain wrong, so just because it's written it doesn't mean it's true.

[Abyss]

Y'know, if the world itself interests you, you might want to check out Esslemont's NIGHT OF KNIVES. It's a (somewhat) less complex novella in the same world (Esslemont co-created with SE but was published later) and it may answer some of your questions and give you more context for the series.

On the other hand, reiterating HD reiterating me, you're more than welcome at the Other Lit forum if Malaz isn't your cup of grog.

- Abyss, ...groggy.

[Epiph]

George Awesome, on 27 January 2010 - 06:21 AM, said:

Reply to Epiph: white text is him, red is me:

WHY DOES EVERYONE ALWAYS THINK I'M A DUDE?!

Quote

It's magic, so it lacks a certain amount of logic.
[color="#FF0000"]Mistborn's magic system was good: it was just a circumscribed new set of physical laws, not a method of rescinding them. And as I recall, Winter of the World's was tied to blacksmithing: the rules are laid out and followed.

I didn't say that was how it was always approached. Once I got over how it didn't seem to have the same sort of rigid rules of other fantasy I have read, I kind of liked the idea that magic didn't NEED a system of rules...because it's magic.

As for Kalam, I guess I never read that sequence that well. It's been a while, and DhG isn't my favorite Malazan book, although I think it may be one of the best.

This post has been edited by Epiph: 27 January 2010 - 09:10 PM

[Iconik]

Are we really talking about Bloodfly repellant here? Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

[Abyss]

Iconik, on 27 January 2010 - 09:31 PM, said:

Are we really talking about Bloodfly repellant here? Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

Actually, the bloodflies become hugely significant in book five but you have to RAFO.


- Abyss, ...just kidding. maybe.

[Iconik]

I'd like to add that DG has one of the most ridiculously gut-wrenching endings in a book I've ever read.

[caladanbrood]

Apart from MoI! (no spoilers)

[Iconik]

caladanbrood, on 27 January 2010 - 11:27 PM, said:

Apart from MoI! (no spoilers)

Well yeah. MoI has an extremely sad ending but, the ending of DG...it just tore me to pieces. Dammit.

[Sinisdar Toste]

fiddler and kalam knew the rebellion was coming before they landed their ship, hissar is rife to explode already when coltaine arrives. somebody was gonna take that goddamn book to sha'ik. but the rebellion was happening anyway. was kalam used by prophecy? could he have chosen not to take the book if mebra dropped it at his feet? it happened to kalam because kalam is that character that SE was writing about. if the guy that carried the book was yethal uluard (not an actual character) he would have had to come upon mebra some way as well, take the book and be branded a mass murderer (in his own mind if no one elses) and we would still have a book with a rebellion. also it was the red blades, loyal to malaz apparently, who set it up with mebra and ensured that the book would get to sha'ik, so they could kill her. so really, tene baralta is responsible for the rebellion. or pormqual, who gave him that tomb.

do you see what i'm try to show you here? there is an infinite chain of cause and effect in these books. its stretches far into the past that we know nothing about. kalam is a complicated character already, a backstory not fully revealed concerning the bridgeburners and his life before them. character development is less overt in SE's books, because his characters were fully developed by the time we met them. gamed out by ICE and SE circa 1985, and finally gifted to the written word and those lucky enough to discover it. now some characters i think have been completely developed in the books themselves, but not all. kalam's motivations are there and are valid, calling him a mass murderer for something that was inevitable doesn't fly with me, because kalam as a character is honourable and conscientious and his role only gets better as the books go on.

re: the rules of magic. well the things is, once again, is that magic has rules in this world. they are just very, very complicated and not many people understand them. blood is power is the phrase that we hear over and over. sounds like a founding principle to me.

what i'm trying to say is that you should plow through DG and see how you feel, then read MoI anyway. now either you will see what we all see, or you're beefs with the series will just pile up faster than the dead in capustan (you'll get that if you read MoI) and you won't enjoy it. if you do not enjoy it, i guess you then have the same choice again. Try HoC or give up entirely. either way, you're always welcome here to be our punching bag discuss any topic. (relax, we already have a punching bag. Blame Brood)

[George Awesome]

Epiph, on 27 January 2010 - 09:09 PM, said:

George Awesome, on 27 January 2010 - 06:21 AM, said:

Reply to Epiph: white text is him, red is me:

WHY DOES EVERYONE ALWAYS THINK I'M A DUDE?!

Wow, I'm sorry: that was totally unconscious.

It's a good question, actually: maybe most girls-on-the-internet make more of a point of stressing it, in their avatar or user name?

Still my fault, of course.

Sinisdar Toste, on 28 January 2010 - 02:46 AM, said:

do you see what i'm try to show you here? there is an infinite chain of cause and effect in these books. its stretches far into the past that we know nothing about.

Yeah, I buy that there are reasons within reasons: my complaint wasn't so much an attempt to disprove story continuity as to show an example of the sort of "enforced reader ignorance" that turned me off.

So, again, more my personal distaste for SE's style of doling out info, and less punchably bashing something you like. Hopefully.

This post has been edited by George Awesome: 28 January 2010 - 03:54 AM

[George Awesome]

Iconik, on 27 January 2010 - 09:31 PM, said:

Are we really talking about Bloodfly repellant here? Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

I guess they don't show up much later, but Felisin squeezing maggots out of pockets of dead flesh was one of the grossest things I've read in a book in a while: looking back to it, her feeling "a chill" at the possibility of going blind or deaf, and immediate understanding of the hideous disfigurement that just happened to her ("I've seen those (pockmarked people). Locals. Slaves. Here and there -") coupled with her absolute non-response to hearing about it (she laughs, shivers) - followed by her immediate, obviously-not-in-shock response to news of Beneth's death: "a flood of pain rising up within her, an anguish more thorough in shattering her than anything she'd yet suffered. She staggered back a step," seems weirder than it did the first time: I would have thought that you're either freaked out that bugs just turned you into Freddy Krueger by filling you with maggots, or you're in shock and nothing freaks you out.

And Heboric's comments on them: before they swarmed: "Bloodflies! Drawn, then driven, by the fires" and afterwards: "normally, bloodflies don't swarm. It must have been the flames." That's a much wordier and calmer reaction than mine would have been upon sighting, and then escaping, a cloud of AIDS carrying mosquitoes (in fact, it almost sounds like an author shoehorning in an explanation as to why this doesn't happen all the time, then forgetting and doing it again - but I'm just guessing, and that's kind of harsh): I think I would have been more screaming terrified profanities, maybe laughing about how I was okay then feeling bad that she wasn't, and thinking about stuffing my backpack with mud in case they came back.

If you don't care enough about your life to be a little freaked out when it's saved from a horrible threat as a total surprise to you (Felisin suggests Fener helped him out: "I can make no sense of it (... he sighs) but it seems you're right."), why bother trekking across a desert to save it? I'm not actually asking, just expressing my reaction as I was reading - which was roughly "what's wrong with these people? Do they know what's happening to them? Do they care?"

Just because bloodflies don't show up later in the series doesn't mean they weren't first presented as a horror-movie-monster threat, only defusable by nearby mud, and against which no precautions seem to have been even considered.

This post has been edited by George Awesome: 28 January 2010 - 03:52 AM

[caladanbrood]

Neither Heboric nor Felisin have what you might call normal human reactions to a lot of things - they're both a bit strange in the head, and as for Baudin... well. Group of freaks