[Hetan]

It's possible to white things out though isn't it? Like the spoiler tags on here. I think it would be useful to use that if it's necessary to post something from later books.

[Steve Halter]

Hetan, on 10 January 2011 - 07:31 PM, said:

It's possible to white things out though isn't it? Like the spoiler tags on here. I think it would be useful to use that if it's necessary to post something from later books.

Yes, you can use the text color to white things out. The unofficial standard is to white out real spoilers or at least to put SPOILER tags around things with some spaces so people don't accidentally see them. Sometimes people forget though. Sometimes people just really want to talk about something and don't think about newbies or such.
For example, in Robin's Hetan post, she hadn't thought about the "tweeners". It's all a fairly interesting line to walk on--trying to be informative while not blatantly giving things away.
This seems like a good place for meta-discussion, so thoughts on ways to improve things are always appreciated. (I have no TOR power at all of course--we can just suggest).

[Hetan]

Well we all know that Amanda has never read the books before and that is one of the main ideas on this re-read - to get a POV from a new reader as well as thoughts from others. I would hate for her to have later major events spoiled, so we'll just have to hope that everyone thinks hard before they post.

I've been careful with the few posts I have made to ensure that the information is already available in the chapters previously read - and it's damned hard but actually a lot of fun, to try and ensure you contribute without venturing too far towards the dark side.

[Steve Halter]

Hetan, on 10 January 2011 - 09:23 PM, said:

Well we all know that Amanda has never read the books before and that is one of the main ideas on this re-read - to get a POV from a new reader as well as thoughts from others. I would hate for her to have later major events spoiled, so we'll just have to hope that everyone thinks hard before they post.

I've been careful with the few posts I have made to ensure that the information is already available in the chapters previously read - and it's damned hard but actually a lot of fun, to try and ensure you contribute without venturing too far towards the dark side.

Yeah, how close to walk the line is a fun thing.

[BridgeBurner]

Hetan, on 10 January 2011 - 09:23 PM, said:

Well we all know that Amanda has never read the books before and that is one of the main ideas on this re-read - to get a POV from a new reader as well as thoughts from others. I would hate for her to have later major events spoiled, so we'll just have to hope that everyone thinks hard before they post.

I've been careful with the few posts I have made to ensure that the information is already available in the chapters previously read - and it's damned hard but actually a lot of fun, to try and ensure you contribute without venturing too far towards the dark side.

Yes, it is. It's fun to write your way around spoilers without actually stating stuff, knowing some will get it easily while new readers do get some out of it too

Although, with regards to spoilers, Amanda stated she doesn't mind them. Still, I try to give away as little as possible.


BTW, TOR is preparing for a site upgrade next month, so maybe it'll be possible to hide spoilers easier without having to make the text white (although that option is good enough for me, really).

They're looking for beta testers, btw...

[alt146]

As I said over on the site, I think the best reason to avoid major spoilers is not to preserve the newbies but to keep the discussion focused on the chapter at hand. There is so much stuff early on in book two that relates directly to the end of book four, the conversation could easily get derailed and end up as a discussion of hte series as a whole, rather than of the specific chapters being read.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

Review of chapter 8 and 9 is up.
Link

[Steve Halter]

Review of 10 and 11 is up.
Link

[BridgeBurner]

alt146, on 11 January 2011 - 05:58 AM, said:

As I said over on the site, I think the best reason to avoid major spoilers is not to preserve the newbies but to keep the discussion focused on the chapter at hand. There is so much stuff early on in book two that relates directly to the end of book four, the conversation could easily get derailed and end up as a discussion of hte series as a whole, rather than of the specific chapters being read.

Alt, I am going to disagree here. This is a reread, not a first read.

A reread as being done here should be a stage to discuss what you read, with knowing what happens in future books. Keeping discussion restricted to the chapters at hand is going to kill this in the longer run.

So, there are new Malazan Readers. But this reread is going too slow for even them, and they have moved on way past DG now. So why should the majority of posters not be able to discuss overall things, because there are a poster or 2, 3 who haven't gone further than DG?

New readers can always come here, as they have been doing for years.

And if they are lucky, their questions are answered personally, and not with a 'check the forum history' remark.

[Steve Halter]

Review of chapters 12 and 13 up.
Link

[Steve Halter]

Tor just also opened a "The Crippled God" prediction thread over there.
Link

[Steve Halter]

Chapter 16 & 17 review is up.
Link.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

Chapter 18 and 19

This post has been edited by Bauchelain the Evil: 16 February 2011 - 06:07 PM

[Spiridon_Deannis]

Lovely entry by Mr. Erikson over at the reread. Some pleasures need no propps ??? I just pissed myself...

133. StevenErikson
Tuesday February 22, 2011 01:00pm EST
Flag | Bookmark
The problem with formalism and similar approaches to critical theory is that they define themselves through a set of parameters that divides the subject into those elements (within that subject) that fit said parameters and those that don't; and then promptly dismisses the latter.

But I'm not chiming in here to argue critical theory ad nauseum. The problem I wish to address regarding critical theory is specific to this site and its intent. Academics dissect; they never vivisect. In order to engage they have to first kill that with which they are engaging. In this case, what they kill is Story. Now, fine, that's what's academics do. But this is a cold, clinical exercise. It demands a full disengagement of emotional aspects that are inherent in Story; whereas what a story seeks to do is the very opposite: engage the audience, on levels that are in essence ephemeral and ineffable (this is why millions can love Harry Potter or Twilight while the academics choke and gnash their teeth in disbelief). Story succeeds in this through the use of numerous narrative techniques, with are both familiar (and thus satisfying to the audience) and effective (which is why storytellers, generation upon generation, make use of them).

The analytical approach is like asking a dog to chose colours when it can only see in black and white. So long as the dog is in its pack they're all happy, because in that pack, why, it's a black and white world.

But that's not quite what I mean (I actually wrote another version of this response but it was eaten by an iffy internet connection, so I'm rewriting it by memory). Let me try this way: even when people come on to make comments on subtextual elements to this story, they tend to do so with an air of excitement or appreciation; in turn this invites others to join in, and the streams flows and flows well. And people feel pleasure.

Voicing criticisms based on formalism or any of a dozen other square-peg-round-hole theoretical frameworks is all very well, but Ab, friend, this isn't the place. I suspect the reason others get frustrated with some of your comments is that you appear to be disengaged emotionally, and fully caught up in critical theory to the extent that you impinge on the flow -- you drop stones in the stream. Things back up, swirl and get muddy.

I am not suggesting that you once again recuse yourself from this discussion. What I am suggesting is that some sensitivity to context may be required on your part (as an aside, this is one of the problems of critical structuralism: it's woefully blind to context). I would hope that even four or five novels into this series, you might recognise that my writing and my approach to writing is all about context. Maybe I should say that again: my writing and my approach to writing is all about context. Now, you might conclude, this is why I have no time for formalism or most other forms of critical thinking, and you would be right. They are, to my mind, dead modes of thought, and even more distressing, they are deadening modes of thought.

There are many kinds of pleasure to be had to from reading, but for the sake of simplicity let's divide them (formalistically) into intellectual pleasure and emotional pleasure (the latter to which, as subheading, we can place spiritual pleasure). Thus far, Ab, all I am getting from your commentary has been exclusively intellectual. Do I begin to see why?

Some pleasures need no propps.

Finally, Ab, ref the quote you tagged onto your comment on the Life As A Human essay ... what is its relevance?

Cheers
Steve (written in Leeds, while on book tour...)


http://www.tor.com/b...8-and-19#166035

[Bauchelain the Evil]

haha I really missed that pun on my first read. It was actually very funny.

Anyway happy SE has time an willingness to partecipate

This post has been edited by Bauchelain the Evil: 22 February 2011 - 07:40 PM

[Ceda Cicero]

amphibian, on 31 December 2010 - 02:52 PM, said:

Abalieno, on 31 December 2010 - 02:14 PM, said:

Is it not natural guessing and interpreting what you read, as you read it? Should one restrain to discuss anything till it's completely done?

You may be speculating in your head. What you are actually writing in the comments over there is not purely innocent speculation, though.

Quote

They even say I ignore what everyone else says, which strikes me as funny as I pay a lot of attention about what everyone writes and I do enjoy engaging with active discussions (like in the Pust case, where I've explained the motivations why I interpret the character a certain way, and asked others to explain their reasons why they interpret him differently, but I didn't get any, if not one case of someone else agreeing with me. See #88).

No. I am not saying that you ignore what everyone else says. I am saying that you are not processing the criticism directed your way. It's one thing to shrug off things like "Go away" or "You stink". It's another when people start engaging in specific and lengthy criticisms of things you say and do.

You also received a lengthy response/analysis as to why Iskaral Pust has not lost control of his marbles or babbling in my response to you at #84. It happens to be a view that passes muster with many others here. But you ignored or missed that.

I also wanted to say that I believe that Beneth beats Felisin partly because he's lost her and partly because it is within the nature of humans who have been lashed verbally or physically (as Beneth was by the Malazan commander) to lash out at their inferiors. Beneth in particular is prone to this because he perpetuates a system of abuse and psychological and physical control on both his personal chattels and the slaves within the mines. You didn't quite go deep enough for my own tastes.

I would say few people want you to leave and never come back. Or to make a stink about that departure. All I ask for is that you actually pay attention to what people say to you and adjust in response.

Bend a little. Don't break.

I just have to risk being a little devilish here and bump this fantastic little exchange in light of SEs comments on the reread thread.

[Spiridon_Deannis]

Ciceronian, on 22 February 2011 - 08:08 PM, said:

amphibian, on 31 December 2010 - 02:52 PM, said:

Abalieno, on 31 December 2010 - 02:14 PM, said:

Is it not natural guessing and interpreting what you read, as you read it? Should one restrain to discuss anything till it's completely done?

You may be speculating in your head. What you are actually writing in the comments over there is not purely innocent speculation, though.

Quote

They even say I ignore what everyone else says, which strikes me as funny as I pay a lot of attention about what everyone writes and I do enjoy engaging with active discussions (like in the Pust case, where I've explained the motivations why I interpret the character a certain way, and asked others to explain their reasons why they interpret him differently, but I didn't get any, if not one case of someone else agreeing with me. See #88).

No. I am not saying that you ignore what everyone else says. I am saying that you are not processing the criticism directed your way. It's one thing to shrug off things like "Go away" or "You stink". It's another when people start engaging in specific and lengthy criticisms of things you say and do.

You also received a lengthy response/analysis as to why Iskaral Pust has not lost control of his marbles or babbling in my response to you at #84. It happens to be a view that passes muster with many others here. But you ignored or missed that.

I also wanted to say that I believe that Beneth beats Felisin partly because he's lost her and partly because it is within the nature of humans who have been lashed verbally or physically (as Beneth was by the Malazan commander) to lash out at their inferiors. Beneth in particular is prone to this because he perpetuates a system of abuse and psychological and physical control on both his personal chattels and the slaves within the mines. You didn't quite go deep enough for my own tastes.

I would say few people want you to leave and never come back. Or to make a stink about that departure. All I ask for is that you actually pay attention to what people say to you and adjust in response.

Bend a little. Don't break.

I just have to risk being a little devilish here and bump this fantastic little exchange in light of SEs comments on the reread thread.

Well, I´ll *absolve* you, you little devil ! The *blablahead* in question seems to be insisting on a pissing match for intellectual superiority & just gets creamed over again and again.
And if he is consequent, this little comment of mine here is going to piss him off SOOO much that he will sulkingly retire from all posting for the next...uh...35 minutes...to punish us with his absence...^^

This post has been edited by Spiridon_Deannis: 22 February 2011 - 11:21 PM

[amphibian]

Spiridon_Deannis, on 22 February 2011 - 11:20 PM, said:

Well, I´ll *absolve* you, you little devil ! The *blablahead* in question seems to be insisting on a pissing match for intellectual superiority & just gets creamed over again and again.
And if he is consequent, this little comment of mine here is going to piss him off SOOO much that he will sulkingly retire from all posting for the next...uh...35 minutes...to punish us with his absence...^^

Stop that.

He bring something to the table - even if it's a bit much and perhaps of the wrong shape or size sometimes. What do you gain from crapping all over him? Not much.

I really, really enjoy these Tor re-reads. I want to point out how respectful the advanced readers are being to the newer readers regarding spoilers and how creative and imaginative the discussion is. The format of the re-read is absolutely a wonderful thing and I hope it gets preserved in some format for a long, long time (perhaps on here - wink, wink).

[Spiridon_Deannis]

amphibian, on 23 February 2011 - 03:24 AM, said:

Spiridon_Deannis, on 22 February 2011 - 11:20 PM, said:

Well, I´ll *absolve* you, you little devil ! The *blablahead* in question seems to be insisting on a pissing match for intellectual superiority & just gets creamed over again and again.
And if he is consequent, this little comment of mine here is going to piss him off SOOO much that he will sulkingly retire from all posting for the next...uh...35 minutes...to punish us with his absence...^^

Stop that.

He bring something to the table - even if it's a bit much and perhaps of the wrong shape or size sometimes. What do you gain from crapping all over him? Not much.

I really, really enjoy these Tor re-reads. I want to point out how respectful the advanced readers are being to the newer readers regarding spoilers and how creative and imaginative the discussion is. The format of the re-read is absolutely a wonderful thing and I hope it gets preserved in some format for a long, long time (perhaps on here - wink, wink).

amph, old chap, that guy has been shat on over there and over here and in the past has announced over there his rather dramatic withdrawal from active duty because he has been shat on over there and over here...and you wanna know what ? After sulking for a month, back he is in full bloom, happily spreading his very own, peculiarly disconnected weirdness around, which I kinda find entertaining by now...but anyways - do you really, REALLY think that a lowly dork like me would have the power to keep THAT gentleman away from interacting DIRECTLY with Mr. Steven Erikson himself over at TOR, depriving himself of unaccounted dry orgasms to no end ? I actually AM flattered by your confidence in my might, but do not worry - my powers do not extend to such heights. HE will be there, so will WE, and the reread will continue in its very deliciously idiosyncratic format.

With very kind regards,

S_D aka Taitastigon (which should ring a bell from over there)...

This post has been edited by Spiridon_Deannis: 24 February 2011 - 03:28 AM

[Steve Halter]

Chapters 20 & 21