[ansible]

To be fair, Martin did seem personable and relaxed when he was speaking to the crowd and reading excerpts. That's partially why I was so surprised when I got up to see him. When AFoC came out, everyone was (rightly) upset about the decision to split AFoC/ADwD by character and geography. He went into some detail during the event - the publishers couldn't bind that many pages, he didn't want to split the book into Vols. I and II, etc. Anyway, he made a comment about the European publishers, and how all of the ASoIaF books are split into multiple volumes in Europe, sometimes even three or four separate books for one novel, and how successful it had been. He didn't seem bothered by this at all, barely mentioning it. In my mind, this was confusing - why does he care so much about not splitting AFoC into two volumes if he has no problem doing this to ALL of his books in other countries? Maybe he doesn't care about any market besides the US, or whatever, I didn't know.

So I got up there and said something like, "Since the European method of multiple volumes seems to have worked, did you ever consider doing something similar with AFoC?" He said, "No," signed my book, and turned to the next guy in line. I wasn't expecting much, but he had seemed to answer other people's questions faithfully. Anyway, I definitely got an irritated vibe from him. Perhaps it's my own fault for asking about a subject I'm sure he was sick of, but I thought at least that I had a different angle on it than he had addressed earlier. This just furthers my suspicions that his reasons were really excuses, and he was just tired of having to justify splitting the novel like he did. And I still think he made the wrong choice, anyway.

This post has been edited by ansible: 18 February 2010 - 11:45 AM

[Werthead]

ansible, on 18 February 2010 - 09:54 AM, said:

So I got up there and said something like, "Since the European method of multiple volumes seems to have worked, did you ever consider doing something similar with AFoC?" He said, "No," signed my book, and turned to the next guy in line. I wasn't expecting much, but he had seemed to answer other people's questions faithfully. Anyway, I definitely got an irritated vibe from him. Perhaps it's my own fault for asking about a subject I'm sure he was sick of, but I thought at least that I had a different angle on it than he had addressed earlier. This just furthers my suspicions that his reasons were really excuses, and he was just tired of having to justify splitting the novel like he did. And I still think he made the wrong choice, anyway.

You wouldn't believe how many times GRRM got asked that question on that signing tour Agreed that he shouldn't have been that dismissive, but if in the course of six months or so you have to answer the exact same question (which is addressed on your website and in the back of AFFC as well) about 4,000 times, you might get slightly tired of it as well. I'm sure most writers have the same issues at time.

The reason AFFC couldn't be split in the manner you suggest is that the flipside events involving characters like Dany, Jon, Tyrion etc hadn't been finished at that time, and to split the book in that manner would have entailed a lot longer wait for the book.

[ansible]

Werthead, on 19 February 2010 - 02:18 PM, said:

ansible, on 18 February 2010 - 09:54 AM, said:

So I got up there and said something like, "Since the European method of multiple volumes seems to have worked, did you ever consider doing something similar with AFoC?" He said, "No," signed my book, and turned to the next guy in line. I wasn't expecting much, but he had seemed to answer other people's questions faithfully. Anyway, I definitely got an irritated vibe from him. Perhaps it's my own fault for asking about a subject I'm sure he was sick of, but I thought at least that I had a different angle on it than he had addressed earlier. This just furthers my suspicions that his reasons were really excuses, and he was just tired of having to justify splitting the novel like he did. And I still think he made the wrong choice, anyway.

You wouldn't believe how many times GRRM got asked that question on that signing tour Agreed that he shouldn't have been that dismissive, but if in the course of six months or so you have to answer the exact same question (which is addressed on your website and in the back of AFFC as well) about 4,000 times, you might get slightly tired of it as well. I'm sure most writers have the same issues at time.

The reason AFFC couldn't be split in the manner you suggest is that the flipside events involving characters like Dany, Jon, Tyrion etc hadn't been finished at that time, and to split the book in that manner would have entailed a lot longer wait for the book.

No, really, I do know the reasons given for the way the book was published - I just don't find them acceptable, and I don't like the end result. I imagine many people who have waited over ten years to read about half of the characters feel the same. Like you pointed out, he obviously expected this negative fan reaction, so I don't see how he justifies being rude to people who ask about it politely. As the author, he clearly has the right to take as long as he wants to publish the next novel (or not), but similarly, as a fan, I feel I have the right to be upset about it.

[ansible]

Also, sorry, I have to laugh - "a lot longer wait for the book"? I mean, come on...

[Terez]

Werthead, on 19 February 2010 - 02:18 PM, said:

You wouldn't believe how many times GRRM got asked that question on that signing tour Agreed that he shouldn't have been that dismissive, but if in the course of six months or so you have to answer the exact same question (which is addressed on your website and in the back of AFFC as well) about 4,000 times, you might get slightly tired of it as well. I'm sure most writers have the same issues at time.

I know RJ did. It annoys the hard core fans much more than it ever did him...I would always get so angry at these people for asking the same stupid questions - as soon as the first tour stop is over, the reports are online with all the answers to the standard questions, and there is rarely variation with those - instead of asking important plot-related questions. Probably the one question that drove RJ to the point of being....well, pretty much being a smartass....was 'Where was Mat in this book?' on the tour for The Path of Daggers. After a while, he was telling people, 'LOOK. HE HAD A BRICK WALL FALL ON HIM. HE WILL BE ALRIGHT, I PROMISE.'

Oh, and the Asmodean question. I only have the interesting answers in my database, of course, and how many people do you think have gotten an irritated-sounding RAFO on that question? Probably quite a few.....

This post has been edited by Terez: 02 March 2010 - 06:19 AM

[foolio]

I tapped out after the first Bakker book. Just not for me.

Quote

Oh, and the Asmodean question. I only have the interesting answers in my database, of course, and how many people do you think have gotten an irritated-sounding RAFO on that question?

I dont think he ever said RAFO to the asmodean question, I think he always said he was amazed people couldnt figure it out and it should be quite obvious.

This post has been edited by foolio: 05 March 2010 - 08:32 PM

[braxat2000]

Hi,
For me also in the category of epic sagas which started promising and turned out crap is the sword of truth series by terry goodkind.
I always thought about this question, but to me all three of the mentioned writers almost drove me from reading fantasy altogether.

Wheel of time started very good in my opinion. Up to book 5 or 6 maybe it was very good. Then it became drivel, and I just couldn't go on. I read up till book 9, which is three books of nothing happens, and I felt like this writer is using me to make money for an endless series. A shame, because there were some nice moments aong the way. I maybe will return to it to finish the story, but it depends on reviews of it.

Then I started reading sword of truth. Again started very nice, up to book four I think I liked it, but then it became so tedious I just stopped reading this series. A waste of time and money, and a shame.

Then I heard so many good thing about "realistic, brutal, grim and blah blah" series by Martin. Well of I went giving it a chance. I didn't like it, sorry but it was like trying to read a shocking display of horrible moments happening to my characters, and to me 8 years children killing people was a very bad turn off. If I wanted to read on horrible things I could read the news..

Also what I hate about this series is that the good guys are mostly stupid and bad things happen to them, the bad guys win, the women are mad/stupid/unrealistic and I just couldn't stand it.

But the first three books were ok then came book 4 which was boring. Very much like what jordan books turned into. I actually stopped reading whole chapters about that brinne or something ilke that character. Also the fact that he writes a book every ten years is a lack of dedication as a writer to his readers. So I dropped this series also.

And then I decided not to read epic fantasy anymore (my favorite fantasy genre).

But I did see gardens of the moon at the book store, and by a hunch decided it is interesting. I waited until a year ago and when reviews remained high I bought the book, and after two weeks bought the rest of the series and the two ICE books as well.

It was a long time since I was moved to like the characters so much, and hate the villains so much. There are some issues I don't like but they are so minor I don't care, the story is powerful and original, there are amazing scenes, and sometimes they are so powerful I just reread them even out loud which I don't remember doing. I care for the world Erikson has built.

Also ten points from me for his dedication to the readers, and writing so much and so quickly is a sign to that.

I read many many books over the years, this one is one of my best .

So thank you Steve Erikson (and Ian C Esselmont) so giving me such hours of enjoyment.

P.S
All the above is my personal opinion, please fell free not to agree with it at all

This post has been edited by braxat2000: 08 March 2010 - 02:10 PM

[foolio]

I got fed up with what I thought was RJ abuse of fans. Maybe I am wrong but for a while he just meandered around in circles describing womens clothing.(I hated this, not to mention I really despised the characters wearing said clothing) He also seemed to have very little regard for his readers , at one point I saw an interview where he said if something happened to him his wife had instructions to burn all of his notes and not to let someone else finish the series. This was before he got sick and obviously this changed, but it really ticke me off. From that point on I quit buying his books and just got them from the library. I dont want to support someone who hates me or thinks my feelings are beneath him. And at the rate he was writing the series was never going to end.

From descriptions of GRRM , and from comments here I know he is not for me. Seems to dispise his fans and I am glad I have never started anything of his. Seems kind of like a Diva, but i certainly cant comment on his wriritn, because as I said above, I have never read a single page...

Erikson, I like. he seems to care about his readers and seems to treat his writing professionally. I was a bit cheesed that he let ICE finish up what I personally found to be the most interesting story line of the series, but I will get over it.

[Terez]

RJ said that about destroying his hard drive because he had gotten death threats from people who wanted to find out the end of the series. And the tripe about the clothing descriptions is just ludicrous. Yeah, he describes what people are wearing, but he does not do it incessantly. And I have to wonder why you would even read a book about characters you hate.

[Werthead]

foolio, on 08 March 2010 - 05:21 PM, said:

From descriptions of GRRM , and from comments here I know he is not for me. Seems to dispise his fans and I am glad I have never started anything of his. Seems kind of like a Diva, but i certainly cant comment on his wriritn, because as I said above, I have never read a single page...

GRRM is pretty heavily engaged with his fanbase, and very positively so. The problem has come that his response to people taking the mickey out of him for various things (writing time of the books, personal appearance etc) is usually pretty robust, and these people then toodle off to the Internet and complain about how GRRM hates all his fans, usually leaving out the bit where they slagged him off for his weight or something beforehand. One thing that did happen is a commentator who went around saying GRRM had deleted all his posts from his blog because he was mildly critical of the writing time of ADWD, and thus GRRM was against freedom of speech. What really happened is this commentator pretended to be GRRM himself (using the same icon and the name 'GRRRM') and started sending obscene messages to female posters on his blog. For some reason this commentator thought this behaviour was appropriate and should have been indulged and got bent out of sorts when it wasn't.

This situation is now almost a meme, and like most memes its relationship to factual reality is limited at best. My instinct is to fight against it, but a fair number of other GRRM fans take the view that ignoring it is best, which is clearly not working out so well.

Quote

I was a bit cheesed that he let ICE finish up what I personally found to be the most interesting story line of the series, but I will get over it.

I'd get ready for more of this. A lot more. Fortunately I think ICE is just as good a writer as Erikson, so it's not a huge problem for me.

[Grief]

Keep it civil please. Explanation and discussion are fine, personal attacks are not...

[Yellow]

Werthead, on 08 March 2010 - 10:27 PM, said:

I think ICE is just as good a writer as Erikson, so it's not a huge problem for me.

Do you really think that, or do you just think that ICE has better plots/action? I realise plotting is one aspect of writing, but ICE isn't anywhere near as developed as Erikson. NoK felt pretty amateur to me (it's been a while so I can't really remember why any more), and while I enjoyed RotCG, I think ICE struggled at times to get the description across. Lots of people "shrugged their indifference" and "moaned their pain" or "gasped their surprise". If you ever re-read that book, you should count how many times he uses that technique.

Having said that, I did enjoy RotCG more than the past few Erikson books because it had pace and dealt with characters I gave a shit about. So maybe you have a point in that respect, since he is more successful in what he attempts than Erikson, but I don't think he's as talented technically.

[Werthead]

Yellow, on 09 March 2010 - 07:32 AM, said:

Do you really think that, or do you just think that ICE has better plots/action? I realise plotting is one aspect of writing, but ICE isn't anywhere near as developed as Erikson. NoK felt pretty amateur to me (it's been a while so I can't really remember why any more), and while I enjoyed RotCG, I think ICE struggled at times to get the description across. Lots of people "shrugged their indifference" and "moaned their pain" or "gasped their surprise". If you ever re-read that book, you should count how many times he uses that technique.

Having said that, I did enjoy RotCG more than the past few Erikson books because it had pace and dealt with characters I gave a shit about. So maybe you have a point in that respect, since he is more successful in what he attempts than Erikson, but I don't think he's as talented technically.

In terms of writing quality, NoK (ICE's first novel) is on a par with GotM (Erikson's first novel), although GotM is longer and has more interesting stuff going on, making it a stronger book. I haven't read Erikson's mid-1990s books that showed his development as a writer before coming back to MALAZAN do DHG, but by DHG Erikson had clearly become a much stronger writer. ICE is still learning the craft and improving (although RotCG was a huge improvement over NoK). However, Erikson also topped out at MoI and elements of MT and has been spinning his wheels in terms of writing development since that time (TTH showed some signs of writing improvement, but also demonstrated a lessening ability to control pacing). With RotCG ICE demonstrated an ability to keep the story moving and engrossing. In terms of actual plot-relevant developments in the overall series, RotCG has more important stuff happening in it than any Erikson book since at least TBH, but is a clear 200 pages shorter and leaner.

It remains to be seen if ICE will reach the heights of writing ability Erikson demonstrated in DHG, MoI and perhaps MT (although MT does have a purple prose overload at the start that does lessen its quality, but right now, comparing RotCG to TTH and DoD, they're pretty much on a par. ICE is writing like Erikson with the fat trimmed away.

[Use Of Weapons]

Utter nonsense. TTH is a demonstration of masterful narrative writing. RotCG is a mess. Saying NoK is equivalent in quality to GotM is claptrap. GotM's structure, pacing, character realisation, dialogue, humour, and complexity, are all streets ahead of NoK.

While it's true that SE can try some things in his writing that may not work for all readers, ICE can't even conceive that trying those things is possible. Because, for him, they are not. He is clearly riding on the coattails of the affection for the series, or Bantam would never have gambled on him.

[polishgenius]

jitsukerr, on 09 March 2010 - 11:26 AM, said:

Utter nonsense. TTH is a demonstration of masterful narrative writing. RotCG is a mess.

Whatever one thinks of TTG, what it was aiming for, and whether it achieved it, a masterful narrative it is not. There's too many bits of the plot that have no connection to each other, and one which doesn't appear to be connected to anything much.

As for Esslemont, I seriously don't understand the dislike he gets from a lot of Malazan fans. Sure, some things he's nowhere near Erikson - he's not nearly as flamboyant a writer and his prose can be lacking in comparison - but in one book he showed more of a knack for quieter character moments than Erikson has in eight, and Wert's not wrong that his structural discipline is superior.

[Werthead]

Quote

TTH is a demonstration of masterful narrative writing.

No. It is a demonstration of a writer aiming for masterful narrative writing and falling short. It isn't Malazan's Crossroads of Twilight (a common criticism), but it is a somewhat inert novel and clearly both massively overwritten and hugely overlong (to the tune of about 400 pages). I enjoyed it regardless, but RotCG is frankly the superior work.

Quote

GotM's structure, pacing, character realisation, dialogue, humour, and complexity, are all streets ahead of NoK.

Even the author says GotM's structure, pacing, character realisation, dialogue, humour and complexity are heavily problematic for many readers and critics. NoK has conciseness working in its favour.

GotM is the better book, however, as it hints at the series' overall complexity and structural flexibility (its primary assets), whilst NoK suffers from being very slight and inconsequential, and tells us nothing of substance about the historical event it purports to be about.

Quote

While it's true that SE can try some things in his writing that may not work for all readers, ICE can't even conceive that trying those things is possible. Because, for him, they are not. He is clearly riding on the coattails of the affection for the series, or Bantam would never have gambled on him.

The Malazan series is not financially successful enough for this to make sense. If it was Jordan or Martin using their sales-power to get their publishers to give their mate a job, I could see that making sense, but Erikson is nowhere near that sales bracket. ICE has to stand or fall by his own merits. Given the decent critical reception his books have received, that seems to be working out for him.

[caladanbrood]

Personally, I enjoyed RotCG. But it definitely benefited hugely from previously-established characters. It was more of an "Oh wow, is thais really happening with these characters?" book than a stand-alone.

Perfect example of two authors working together for the greater good

[Use Of Weapons]

polishgenius, on 09 March 2010 - 12:52 PM, said:

jitsukerr, on 09 March 2010 - 11:26 AM, said:

Utter nonsense. TTH is a demonstration of masterful narrative writing. RotCG is a mess.

Whatever one thinks of TTG, what it was aiming for, and whether it achieved it, a masterful narrative it is not. There's too many bits of the plot that have no connection to each other, and one which doesn't appear to be connected to anything much.

I didn't say it was a masterful narrative. I said it was masterful narrative writing, that is, writing consistently in a chosen narrative voice. Now, you may decide not to like that voice, but you cannot say that it is neither consistent nor well done. Complaints about length or padding (which I fully understand) proceed directly from this choice of narrative voice.

And as for complaining about bits of plot that appear to have no connection to the rest -- um, I'd have thought that by the eighth book everyone would be used to that?

polishgenius, on 09 March 2010 - 12:52 PM, said:

As for Esslemont, I seriously don't understand the dislike he gets from a lot of Malazan fans. Sure, some things he's nowhere near Erikson - he's not nearly as flamboyant a writer and his prose can be lacking in comparison - but in one book he showed more of a knack for quieter character moments than Erikson has in eight, and Wert's not wrong that his structural discipline is superior.

There are so many abysmal writing errors in RotCG that I am not going to enumerate them here. Instead, I point you to this thread which pretty much sums up my position.

[foolio]

Quote

I'd get ready for more of this. A lot more. Fortunately I think ICE is just as good a writer as Erikson, so it's not a huge problem for me.

Well we are certainly going to have to agree to disagree on this. I thought NoK was average at best, and personally thought RoTCG was a literary trainwreck and ameteurish. I felt like I was being forced to read the worst book I have ever crawled through in my life. But thats just me.

Quote

RJ said that about destroying his hard drive because he had gotten death threats from people who wanted to find out the end of the series. And the tripe about the clothing descriptions is just ludicrous. Yeah, he describes what people are wearing, but he does not do it incessantly. And I have to wonder why you would even read a book about characters you hate.

I dont know anything about Death Threats. I do live about 100 miles away from where he used to, and spend every other weekend in the same city as he lived. I have even vacationed with a close relative of his wifes, and have never heard a peep about death threats , but thats neither here nor there...Tripe? I see you consider yourself a "WOT fangirl"...thats wonderful. I do not think I am alone in believeing he was overly descriptive of womens clothing(and irrational feelings), and am somewhat shocked that any rational human being would disagree with that...As for why would I read a book with characters I hate, the series did not start off with Elayne, Egwene, and Nyneave as prominently as they became later on. And as their characters grew their arrogance and my dislike for them grew. Honestly the only women I liked in the series were Cadsuane(loved her), Moraine, and strangely enough, Tuon.

This post has been edited by foolio: 09 March 2010 - 04:39 PM

[Salt-Man Z]

While I'll agree that Erikson has his weaknesses, most notably the aforementioned pacing issues and lack of focus, he's clearly far beyond Esslemont in terms of raw technical skill. Erikson can put down prose with a richness and flair that Esslemont (thus far) could only dream of; Esslemont's prose by contrast is flatly pedestrian. That's not to say Esslemont is a bad writer -- RotCG had a better flow than a number of Erikson's recent books -- but he's obviously still very raw, still learning.

If I had to put my finger on it, I'd say that Esslemont can structure a book better, while Erikson can flat-out write better. Frankly, I'd love to see them truly co-author a book. That could be amazing.