[jasbos]

Let me start by saying i have read all the books and can honestly say greatly enjoyed every one some more than others but i love them all.Forge is different it slow dull and has no humour at all in it,before i get people saying its a trilogy it still needs to grip you even if the first book.

I have no re-read it again and its still poor i love these books and recommend them to all my friends they are by far the books i re-read over and over again i like the complicted plots and the exceptional writing.Forge i struggle with and i began to doubt myself but even the re-read gave me little to look forward to.Is this just 1 trilogy to far and in my opinion the wrong story to tell.Will i buy the next two sorry to say no.

yours
jasbos

[Orlion]

I was wondering if these sort of threads were reserved exclusively for Esslemont's books

[Defiance]

That's all very interesting. Poor punctuation aside, your post might be more worthwhile if you detailed exactly what was so bad about the book. You listed that it has no humor, which is a semi-fair criticism. The Tiste sections were largely humorless, but the scenes with the Jaghut? I don't know how people couldn't find those to be hilarious.

Why did you find the story to be dull? Are you not interested in the origins of the Tiste, which is heavily embedded in Malazan mythology? While I didn't like the book as much as those in the Book of the Fallen series, I found that it was very enjoyable, especially because it turned all of my expectations upside down. Mother Dark, the Azathanai, learning about the origins of the Tiste - none of it fit into what I had in my head. It loved that, as everything made perfect sense (creation myths have to be "created" somewhere) while still remaining fresh and interesting. On the other hand, there were a few too many viewpoints for me to really care about (I don't need to see things through every set of eyes that is in attendence), and the build up to the civil war felt like it dragged on at some points. Not having a convergence at the end was understandable, given the landscape of power at this point in time, yet even so I expected something a little more harrowing than what we got. As it stands, the "redder wedding" as Abyss named it more or less felt like the climax of the novel, even though it only happened 3/4 of the way through.

Anyway, those are just a few of my thoughts on why I liked and didn't like the book. Overall, I thought it was really good, but standing on its own I don't think it was amazing. A first time reader wouldn't find all of the information about the Azathanai, Mother Dark, the Shake, the Jaghut, the Dog-runners, etc. to be all that amazing/insightful, given that so much of what makes that stuff interesting is having the context from the Book of the Fallen.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Gallan is telling the tale. Blind Gallan, who ripped out his own eyes. He's not that funny.

[Defiance]

Stalking Stonny, on 25 September 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Gallan is telling the tale. Blind Gallan, who ripped out his own eyes. He's not that funny.

I don't believe that's a valid criticism. While Gallan is telling the tale, he's more or less entering the head of every character he's talking about. If humor was within the capacity of the characters we were reading about, I'm sure we would have seen it.

Take Toll the Hounds as an opposite example. That book is told by Kruppe. Kruppe, who is most surely not a depressed, philosophical, brooding character. Yet we see that constantly in the book when reading about Nimander.

The lack of humor, I think, comes from the very nature of the Tiste. From everything we read about their civilization in Forge of Darkness, they don't seem to be a particularly happy people, at least among the soldiers and the highborn.

[Orlion]

Defiance, on 25 September 2012 - 07:03 PM, said:

The lack of humor, I think, comes from the very nature of the Tiste. From everything we read about their civilization in Forge of Darkness, they don't seem to be a particularly happy people, at least among the soldiers and the highborn.

From what I read thus far, I think that is in part to them merely going through the motions of living. All the things they liked to do; hunt animals with weird name, for example; are no longer possible. They inhabit a dying land that can no longer provide their notions of honor and worthy living. Like Brood said, they only have themselves to hunt now.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Defiance, on 25 September 2012 - 07:03 PM, said:

Stalking Stonny, on 25 September 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Gallan is telling the tale. Blind Gallan, who ripped out his own eyes. He's not that funny.

I don't believe that's a valid criticism. While Gallan is telling the tale, he's more or less entering the head of every character he's talking about. If humor was within the capacity of the characters we were reading about, I'm sure we would have seen it.

Take Toll the Hounds as an opposite example. That book is told by Kruppe. Kruppe, who is most surely not a depressed, philosophical, brooding character. Yet we see that constantly in the book when reading about Nimander.

The lack of humor, I think, comes from the very nature of the Tiste. From everything we read about their civilization in Forge of Darkness, they don't seem to be a particularly happy people, at least among the soldiers and the highborn.

Yes, I was glib and snarky. I apologize. But I do feel that that is a very important point.

I did think the Jaghut scenes had some humor, but see the point you are trying to make: That the humor that was massively present in SE's previous works, was just not to be found in FoD. It could be b/c of the lack of humans, as we haven't seen any Tiste express much comedy. That would be weird and jarring too if suddenly we had these harlequins in Kharkanas, when the only tiste that ever seemed to be remotely funny was Skintick (who was certainly treated as different because of it) Trull with Onrack (and later Quick Ben), and Pearl who was only partly tiste. Considering the precedent, its not too surprising.

However, that really doesn't have much to do with whether you actually enjoyed the WRITING. So I understand. And I definitely agree with you that the overall lack of comedic relief made the book that much harder to read. This all, though, was cast aside because I got SO MUCH FUCKING BACKSTORY, MY PANTS ARE STILL WET.

[Smuuve]

Did you really get backstory? This certainly didn't feel like a prequel to me. Also, the only reason that even made this trilogy possible, was that so many people loved Anomader from the series and wanted more. All this book gave us was that he wasn't really MD's son, and who has that helped?? I have a dozen other criticisims but they could all be laid to dust had Anomander been 30 - 50% of this novel. As should have been.

[Defiance]

I have to disagree with you there, Smuuve. Reading about Anomander for half of the book is not something everyone would have enjoyed. Personally, I believe it would have made his character less interesting. Just take Malazan Book of the Fallen as an example. Tons of people love Anomander Rake, and yet he barely gets any screen time. I believe it's that lack of screen time that makes him such a powerful character - when we do see him, he is acting effectively and decisively.

We definitely got some backstory. Not in the way many people expected - we certainly didn't see the birth of the universe or anything like that, but there's a lot of stuff here that helps explain things in later books. Take the Azathanai being primarily Elder Gods for example, the fact that Tiste society was originally unified and the split came through the creation of a religion and a magical gift, we've learned why the Jaghut War on Death was started, and saw the beginnings of several other races as well. There's still a lot of questions in the air, but Erikson has two more books to answer some of the stuff that arose in this one.

Personally, I'm glad that it didn't feel like a prequel. Too often prequels set out with the goal of simply explaining what can be inferred, telling us things we already know, and answering every little fan question. To me, a prequel like that isn't interesting - it's a story being told for the sake of answers, rather than a story being told because it can stand on its own.

Like I said earlier, this wasn't my favorite Malazan book. Things proceeded at a crawl for a lot of the book, and despite some great scenes I didn't feel like a whole lot happened. I'm certainly glad, however, that Erikson is telling his own story with it, regardless of people's desires of expectations.

[Sinisdar Toste]

Defiance, on 26 September 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

I have to disagree with you there, Smuuve. Reading about Anomander for half of the book is not something everyone would have enjoyed. Personally, I believe it would have made his character less interesting. Just take Malazan Book of the Fallen as an example. Tons of people love Anomander Rake, and yet he barely gets any screen time. I believe it's that lack of screen time that makes him such a powerful character - when we do see him, he is acting effectively and decisively.

We definitely got some backstory. Not in the way many people expected - we certainly didn't see the birth of the universe or anything like that, but there's a lot of stuff here that helps explain things in later books. Take the Azathanai being primarily Elder Gods for example, the fact that Tiste society was originally unified and the split came through the creation of a religion and a magical gift, we've learned why the Jaghut War on Death was started, and saw the beginnings of several other races as well. There's still a lot of questions in the air, but Erikson has two more books to answer some of the stuff that arose in this one.

Personally, I'm glad that it didn't feel like a prequel. Too often prequels set out with the goal of simply explaining what can be inferred, telling us things we already know, and answering every little fan question. To me, a prequel like that isn't interesting - it's a story being told for the sake of answers, rather than a story being told because it can stand on its own.

Like I said earlier, this wasn't my favorite Malazan book. Things proceeded at a crawl for a lot of the book, and despite some great scenes I didn't feel like a whole lot happened. I'm certainly glad, however, that Erikson is telling his own story with it, regardless of people's desires of expectations.

also glad it didn't have a prequel vibe, but how anyone can say this book isn't 100% backstory escapes me.

[Puck]

Sinisdar Toste, on 26 September 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

also glad it didn't have a prequel vibe, but how anyone can say this book isn't 100% backstory escapes me.

Agreed, and also: did anyone really expect a typical prequel from Erikson?

[Defiance]

I don't think people really expected a typical prequel, but I do think that many people had their expectations overturned.

In the early stages of this book, I imagined that it was going to be entirely focused on the Tiste Andii. The idea that the Tiste co-habited the world with the Imass, Jaghut, Assail, and others never even crossed my mind. The origins of the Shake as well as Mother Dark was also caught me offguard. The best part about this all is that it makes perfect sense.

I know a few people don't like the fact that Sheltatha and Sukul apparently contradict the Malazan cannon, but as I'm sure other people have pointed out the fact that First Son of Mother Dark shows us that titles are not always literal.

About the only thing that really threw me off was the mention of the High King. Granted, Kallor wasn't mentioned, so it might not be him. If it is, though, this raises a TON of questions (although it does result in his quote about walking the earth when the Imass were just children actually true). After all, if Kallor is around now, that means that it took tens if not hundreds of thousands of years for anyone to seriously try to take him down. I expect we'll see more on this in later books, though, given how Draconus says "one thing at a time."

[sting01]

Defiance, on 27 September 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

I don't think people really expected a typical prequel, but I do think that many people had their expectations overturned.

In the early stages of this book, I imagined that it was going to be entirely focused on the Tiste Andii. The idea that the Tiste co-habited the world with the Imass, Jaghut, Assail, and others never even crossed my mind. The origins of the Shake as well as Mother Dark was also caught me offguard. The best part about this all is that it makes perfect sense.

I know a few people don't like the fact that Sheltatha and Sukul apparently contradict the Malazan cannon, but as I'm sure other people have pointed out the fact that First Son of Mother Dark shows us that titles are not always literal.

About the only thing that really threw me off was the mention of the High King. Granted, Kallor wasn't mentioned, so it might not be him. If it is, though, this raises a TON of questions (although it does result in his quote about walking the earth when the Imass were just children actually true). After all, if Kallor is around now, that means that it took tens if not hundreds of thousands of years for anyone to seriously try to take him down. I expect we'll see more on this in later books, though, given how Draconus says "one thing at a time."

As stated several time, every legend have a real history in background.

Persons revered today as almost Gods, Jesus for Catholics (such as me) or any other members of Christinity, Mohamad for the Mulsims, Boudha for the Boudhists were at one moment of the human history simply humans. Then a shift in said history happened and they became bigger than simple humans. I believe it is St John who was commisioned (correct wording?) by the roman emperor to provide an accurate and neutral report on Jesus of Nazareth, sadi report being now a part of the Catholic canonical scripture.

So , at the opposite of many , I am not at all surprise by both the begining of Mother Dark neither by all the old races being on the same planet (at least, maybe a planet with a single continent as was Earth at the Gondwana age).

The differences btw MBotF and FoD can also be explained in that way, time flow, men forget, and for exemple , Older Gods were only Older when compared with basic malazans citizens, who indeed have new Gods.

Without going religious, we can find similar exemple from the human history : Frederic II Hohenstafen (Stupor Mundi), his grand father Barbarossa ... both have generated legends , legends indeed taken from their lifes, legends that are at first only figurative way to tell the Emperor life to the servum pecus. Carolus Magnus (Karl der Grosse, Charlemagne) indeed generated tons of legends, all taken from real life events (Roncevaux and Roland being the most famous). While since twenty years it have been discovered graves in eastern europe (Bulgaria....) with mixed couple (homo sapiens male, cro magnon female) who can remenber how a cro magnon look like, how they behaved, speak, even walk? On the other hand, every country does have legends about 'others' who were looking quite similar to us (what is us?) but on the same time were differents , mostly with a closeness to mother nature that we did not have, or have already lost, said personage having the capacity to call back to life animals that have at that time already diseapear. Those myths and legends exist in Europe, they also exist in Asia (Thailand, Japan, Taiwan, Korea) , they do exist also in western africa ; to name only the place where I lived and where I did heard first hand such myths and legends.

So, assumin the author is himself a scholar in history, there is no marvel it took the same way than the history took. On the other hand, I do ask myself to know if the mythology he is creating is not somehow his wet dream, or a historical theory (such one about the Tokkarians, as he did dig in the region soem years ago) that he can not present to the Academy/Univeristy but that he believe to be possible? I would love, I must confess, to ask him directly that question!!!!!!!

[Puck]

Defiance, on 27 September 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

I don't think people really expected a typical prequel, but I do think that many people had their expectations overturned.

What I was trying to get across was that I find it a bit.. silly to have read all ten MBotF books and still cry foul when one's expectations aren't met in FoD. The malazan books thrive on the unexpected, but the moment the word 'prequel' is mentioned people snap back into the typical fantasy notion of a retelling of things we already know. Personally, I had hoped for FoD to be not exclusively about the Tiste Andii and to throw some things to chew on at us, which it did, so I'm delighted. Part of why I enjoy these books is that they never go the way people expect them to and the public outrage after each and every book is published is funny to watch. It happens every time. And still some people insist on thigs to go their way.

[Orlion]

About 200 pages in, and I still don't "see" the problem. The writing is terrific, I've laughed at a few Tiste scenes (sure, it's dry humour, but you don't have to have a character hang his ass off the side of a ship to be 'funny'.) The one thing I would see people having problems with are the soliloquizing qualities of thoughts and conversations. Than again, Erikson did say he would be paying homage to the Bard with this trilogy, so that should not come as a surprise.

And who cares about Rake when the Dramatis Personae includes Hood, Gothos, Olar Ethil, Brood, Errastas, T'riss, etc? And Draconus is getting a lot more screen time than I thought he would...

[Otataral Toblakai]

This is sparta blasphemy! Even though I haven't read FoD (awaiting the completion of the trilogy), no book by SE is bad. Even by Esslemont. Which is my view, btw. Off with the heads of anyone who says otherwise.

Honestly, I am too tired to offer a critique of your critique.

[Puck]

For once, I agree with OT. Well, in parts. Someone please mark this day in a calendar.

[blackzoid]

Defiance, on 26 September 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

I have to disagree with you there, Smuuve. Reading about Anomander for half of the book is not something everyone would have enjoyed. Personally, I believe it would have made his character less interesting. Just take Malazan Book of the Fallen as an example. Tons of people love Anomander Rake, and yet he barely gets any screen time. I believe it's that lack of screen time that makes him such a powerful character - when we do see him, he is acting effectively and decisively.

Very strongly agree. Sometimes less really is more. Take Star Wars books. Thrawn has been devalued because Zahn keeps writing about him. The more we learn about him, the less his aura is preserved. And don't forget Fonzie from Happy Days!
Too much exposure is very bad for cool/powerful characters. They need to be kept off screen to maximise the impact of when they actually are needed. Other characters need to be contrasted against them.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 27 September 2012 - 06:33 PM

[Crow Clan Baby]

So humour-wise am I really the only one who roared my ass off laughing at Envy, Spite and Malice?

[Sinisdar Toste]

oh man, when malice comes in like, "you left me alone in the dark!" well, i would have spewed something if it had been in my mouth at the time.