[FastBen]

http://speculativebo...en-erikson.html

[Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast]

Cool review, the only question I have is why, in the penultimate paragraph, you write 'Erickson', when you've written 'Erikson' everywhere else (EDIT: except once in the last paragraph, too, but my question still stands)? I don't think it's a typo as you did it about three times but only confined to that single paragraph.

...Own up -- you didn't write that paragraph, did you?

Good stuff, otherwise.

This post has been edited by Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast: 08 May 2011 - 07:47 PM

[FastBen]

 Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast, on 08 May 2011 - 07:41 PM, said:

Cool review, the only question I have is why, in the penultimate paragraph, you write 'Erickson', when you've written 'Erikson' everywhere else (EDIT: except once in the last paragraph, too, but my question still stands)? I don't think it's a typo as you did it about three times but only confined to that single paragraph.

...Own up -- you didn't write that paragraph, did you?

Good stuff, otherwise.

Hehe, I didn't realize I did that - thanks for noticing.

Nope, that is me - I just got the job being the new review on that site and that is my first review - I will fix it!

[Puck]

I still take issue with people calling some plotlines 'simply unnecessary', but nice review otherwise.

[Hetan]

I agree somewhat with the above ^^ as I always wonder what the plotlines are that are deemed unnecessary?
It would be nice to know. I think you're not sure yourself as you said - "Its not clear which elements are simply extraneous and which will be resolved in later volumes", so I look forward to your posting further reviews. I don't disagree with you as such, it's just that we all read things differently and my take may not be the same as yours or others.

I do think it's a fair review - and as your first one - thanks very much for posting it.

[FastBen]

 Hetan, on 12 May 2011 - 03:10 PM, said:

I agree somewhat with the above ^^ as I always wonder what the plotlines are that are deemed unnecessary?
It would be nice to know. I think you're not sure yourself as you said - "Its not clear which elements are simply extraneous and which will be resolved in later volumes", so I look forward to your posting further reviews. I don't disagree with you as such, it's just that we all read things differently and my take may not be the same as yours or others.

I do think it's a fair review - and as your first one - thanks very much for posting it.

Well its a matter of debate what is exactly "necessary" or "unnecessary". Personally, I think in the best books each piece contributes directly to the whole. However, Erickson is telling a huuuuge story here - and as a first time reader its hard to judge the unity of everything. Personally, I think the book would not have been much different without the character of Hull Beddict. He leaks to the Tiste Edur information about Letherii strategy, and you can argue that his traitorous back story is somewhat compelling and somehow contributes to the whole picture of the individuals that have been wronged by Letherii society. He could be setting up for something in a later volume as well. But, really I could have lived without him.

I just think Erickson thinks big. Instead of trimming the unnecessary he includes as much as possible having a kind of "bigger is better" mentality. This has its pluses and minuses I think. It really paints a large picture of a large scale world and has an epic feel to it, Sometimes, though, more is actually less as such large cast of characters tends to blur them altogether and they all seem less significant. This comes down to a matter of taste though really - and since I haven't finished the series I will read on and see how I feel about the entirety of it at the end.

But really I love Erickson's books, I'm just trying to be critical as a critic. I try to be tough with my scores not giving anything an 8 or above unless I really really like it. And things might completely change on a re-read. That's why Erikson is tough to a review - I'll be able to give a more accurate score on a second reading.

This post has been edited by FastBen: 12 May 2011 - 10:11 PM

[BlackMoranthofDoom]

The whole beauty of the Malazan series is that there are so many plotlines going on at any givem time that add to the richness of the world. I agree that Erikson thinks big and the series definitely feels overwhelming at times but thats because there is no centralized plot (there is the one revolving around the Crippled God but not everything relates to it), Erikson is telling us of major events hapenning during that period of time.