[Spoilsport Stonny]

Smuuve, on 19 October 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

King Lear, on 12 October 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

Meh. I'm pretty sure Erikson said somewhere that the Kharkanas trilogy wasn't going to focus on Rake anyway, so if you're disappointed by that you probably should have paid more attention in the lead up to the book.

You're "pretty sure" he said it "somewhere", but I should pay more attention. smh

Give King Lear a break. He's a champion horseshoes player.

No matter what, how could anyone, after having read the entire MBotF , then come into a new trilogy with "expectations" and "hopes"? My only assumptions were that the book didn't smell like a poop and had words written in english. Abandon all pretenses when delving into a work of fiction by someone with a lengthy track record of turning expectations on their heads.

"I finally got the town whore to go out with me and she slept with my roommate!"

[Orlion]

I imagine you keep buying 'bestselling authors' because you're afraid of leaving your comfort zone and being challenged. Don't worry, there are plenty of meta-tough reads for such folk.

Further, I'm certain 'bestselling' does not mean what you think it means. It has less to do with how much a book sells with how fast a book sells. As a result, there are some books you will always find, not because they were ever on the NYTBS, but because people will seek them and buy them.

[Abyss]

blackzoid, on 27 September 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

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.

Kanese S, on 13 October 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:

The preservation of Anomander Rake as a sort of larger than life persona, and the air of mystery around him, was one of the things I was quite relieved with in Forge. I think he had just enough "screen time."

THIRDED! or whatever. Rake would not be nearly as loved if we had gotten more of him in the MBF (see also Seguleh pre-OST).

kingryan69, on 13 October 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:

for me the saddest thing was the foreshadowing with Orfantal, especially with how carelessly his death was portrayed in the MBOTF book.

His whole 'glorious death by betrayal' fixation is strikingly different from how he went out in TtH. I'm curious to see where SE goes with that.

[worry]

Yah me too. I think we're gonna see Rake and fam through Orfy's adoring(?) eyes and see at least some glimmers of the Rake we see later. That and Korlat's existence are gonna make Orfantal grow up a bit.

[Sinisdar Toste]

a word on the value of reviews:

i would say reviews are a better way of finding books that you personally might like. reviews give a snapshot overview of plot, character and setting and the skill of the prose. sales give you no information except, 'this many people bought it over this period of time'

pretty useless information in my opinion. twilight sold millions, and it's a mediocre series at best. in all honesty, it really gives me the willies to see somebody using sales as the basis for their opinion on quality.

[Kanese S's]

Smuuve, on 19 October 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:

Defiance, on 13 October 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

Smuuve, on 12 October 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

Defiance, you can disagree if you like, but the proof will be in the totalsales. I don't feel any need to argue my point, we will eventually have a total# of books sold, and we will see how successful it was not to featureAnomander, and how many people are happy with what we got.


To the person who said they "didn't understand" how someone can't seethis is 100% backstory, well, the preable itself tells you that this may or maynot be true, if you understand what 100% means, theres your answer.

Book reviews, not total number of books sold, is a far better way to evaluatehow good a book is. If we're talking in terms of commercial success, then sureyou've got a point, but that's another thing altogether. Compare, for example,Terry Goodkind and Steven Erikson. I think pretty much everyone here wouldagree that Goodkind is shit, yet unless I'm mistaken he's sold a lot more booksthan Erikson. There's a lot of mediocre fantasy out there that has sold betterthan Erikson. How well a book sells is no indication of its quality (another examplebeing the Eragon books). How well the book sells can also hardly be attributedto whether or not it predominantly features Anomander Rake. There are a varietyof factors that contribute to whether or not a book is good rather than the appearanceof a single character (unless we're talking about books with an obvious maincharacter like Harry Potter or Rand al'Thor or something like that). I supposeit's inevitable that there is a clash of views about this, but as stated beforeI really don't think seeing more of Anomander Rake would have been a goodthing. What has made him such an awesome character in the first place is themystery surrounding him and the fact that every scene he appears in he comesoff as awesome. That grandeur would be diminished - at least in my mind - byfollowing him around throughout most of the book.

Really, the reviews are what are important? So authors do tours to drum up Book "reviews" not sales? So they have a NY Times "Best Reviewed List"?? Why do I keep buying books that have "Best Selling Author"? Why have I never seen ads for Best Reviewed Author?? My point was that aruguing who likes it better is superflous, as I can say I like it or I don't like it or I can even say both. But if you bought and liked the book enough to keep it, there is a sale listed, period. Even if you SAY there isn't. Not only that, but what counts as a "review"? Is every mention on every blog a review? Who is the authority that decides what is or isn't a "review" and are you saying you actually scour and total all these sites? Even tho I thought the book was marginally O.K., I have read a review that said FOD was trash. So, even tho it was a blurb in a sci fi posting, it was a review, so by your definition, it is the determining factor in the success of this book.

By the logic that sales correlate best with whether a book is good or not, the Twilight books, 50 Shades of Grey, and Goosebumps are all better than anything Erikson has ever written.

[Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast]

What is it with the sudden number of people turning up out of the blue, just to start random arguments about the most trivial of topics and then disappearing again when it turns out no one agrees with them?

Smuuve, you thought that the book should have shown more of Rake. Great. It didn't, though, and that's just your opinion anyway. What the hell is there to argue about?!

On the topic of popularity / sales, what defiance is trying to say is that just because it sells well doesn't necessarily mean that it's a quality piece of work. Take McDonalds, for example—very popular and most people go there but let's not make any mistake here, the food itself is shite.

Book reviews give an indication of why the reviewer thought that the book was good / bad and therefore you can read them and make an informed decision about whether you might enjoy it. Sales figures just say that a lot of people bought it...fantastic. How useful.

Quote

My point was that aruguing who likes it better is superflous, as I can say I like it or I don't like it or I can even say both. But if you bought and liked the book enough to keep it, there is a sale listed, period.

So...if 11 people bought a book that 1 person liked and 10 people hated, you'd buy it anyway because it had 11 sales? That's what you're telling us.

This post has been edited by Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast: 20 October 2012 - 09:42 PM

[worry]

I prefer to look at a book's snails figures. The more the merrier, I say.

[King Lear]

Smuuve, on 19 October 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

King Lear, on 12 October 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

Meh. I'm pretty sure Erikson said somewhere that the Kharkanas trilogy wasn't going to focus on Rake anyway, so if you're disappointed by that you probably should have paid more attention in the lead up to the book.

You're "pretty sure" he said it "somewhere", but I should pay more attention. smh

Wah wah wahhhhh

[Kanese S's]

Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast, on 20 October 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

What is it with the sudden number of people turning up out of the blue, just to start random arguments about the most trivial of topics and then disappearing again when it turns out no one agrees with them?

Smuuve, you thought that the book should have shown more of Rake. Great. It didn't, though, and that's just your opinion anyway. What the hell is there to argue about?!

On the topic of popularity / sales, what defiance is trying to say is that just because it sells well doesn't necessarily mean that it's a quality piece of work. Take McDonalds, for example—very popular and most people go there but let's not make any mistake here, the food itself is shite.

Book reviews give an indication of why the reviewer thought that the book was good / bad and therefore you can read them and make an informed decision about whether you might enjoy it. Sales figures just say that a lot of people bought it...fantastic. How useful.

Quote

My point was that aruguing who likes it better is superflous, as I can say I like it or I don't like it or I can even say both. But if you bought and liked the book enough to keep it, there is a sale listed, period.

So...if 11 people bought a book that 1 person liked and 10 people hated, you'd buy it anyway because it had 11 sales? That's what you're telling us.

Pretty much. Also, even a bad review might actually convince me to get the book if the things that the reviewer didn't like about it are things that don't bother me or even things that I like. Reviewers usually give quite a bit of detail in what they liked and didn't like about a book, and that detail can inform my choice of whether to check it out or not.