[Uptoolate]

I have been a lover of the malazan books for I think over a decade now. One of the things that I've always appreciated is how much the characters make u feel for them. The give and take between the characters, the banter between the marines, fiddler and hedge, quick and Kalam, bottle and the entire bonehunters, it was always such a great back and forth. I always felt these books did a great job of telling a story while still making u maybe take a look around a little. This first book of this new trilogy felt just like message after message after message! It seemed like a constant claim of how despicable our society is, whether it was comments about idealistic conflict, the burden of a single mother, the downward spiral of someone trying to be a protector, the raping of innocence, the cheap pitty for someone that didn't know they were doing wrong, and so on and so forth. I just felt that every five pages I was reading a new diatribe about some moral issue. What happened to my comical soldiers? What happened to my quirky rapscallions? What happened to my witty banter? Are the next two books going to be page after page about the depression and futility of life? I'm pretty sure I have enough people preaching that around me every day,. Things are shitty, I get it, did I need 500 pages of this book to prove it to me in another world? No. Did I really enjoy the other 130 pages and the history it filled out? YES! So much! I've always loved the abiliyty of these novels to make me sad, to make me so invested that it brings me to tears, cue waterworks at whiskey jacks death, or the fall of coltaine by poor splints arrow, his name was slint right? The main point is the books never made me feel depressed, this book didn't make me have a good cry it just made me feel cold and uninterested.

[Puck]

Did you really expect just more of the same? Just some more Malazans throwing jokes back and forth? In a setting and a society that's as far from the Malazan Empire as it can get? The whole nature of the trilogy is different from that of the main series, so naturally the voice should be different as well. What was it again that we know of the Tiste Andiian nature from the MBotF? ..Exactly.

Also: Squint, his name was Squint.

[Starling]

To some extent I agree. I struggled with this book because there was none of the humour that I loved in the main series and the Korvalain and Korbal Broach series. But wat made this book great for me was the beautiful writing and the slow, careful revelation of back-story for characters I already love.

So I guess it comes down to what exactly you're expecting from the series. We know the Andii survive, so there is at least a bit of hope that not everything will turn out dark and depressing (and one thing I have always loved about Erikson's writing is his ability to sow a tiny seed of hope in a situation that seems impossible). Plus, I can't wait to find out just how we get from the Andii in FoD to the Andii in the main series, and that is what will keep me buying these books and devouring them.

[worry]

Humor sucks.

[madala]

personally, I found Gothos and Haut very funny

[Spoilsport Stonny]

This is like the third one of these threads. I mean, I get it. It wasn't hilarious. Did you think you wandered into the comedy section of the liberry? Jeeze Louise! Go watch Hot Shots Part Deux if you wanna laugh.

[blackzoid]

Puck, on 27 January 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

Did you really expect just more of the same? Just some more Malazans throwing jokes back and forth? In a setting and a society that's as far from the Malazan Empire as it can get? The whole nature of the trilogy is different from that of the main series, so naturally the voice should be different as well. What was it again that we know of the Tiste Andiian nature from the MBotF? ..Exactly.

Also: Squint, his name was Squint.

To be fair, it WAS a lot of a very specific same. Namely most of the pre-convergence sections of Toll the Hounds. It was an awful lot of TTH like inner-whinging in the latest book. Whinging that at least was balanced out in other Malazan books by awesome action and humour and cussers going wallop.

[Puck]

We'll have to agree to disagree. FoD and TtH are only superficially similar. The tone is way different. What they have in common is the omnipotent narrator, but both Kruppe and Fisher not only have different voices but also focus on different things.

Of course, tastes are different, but I think it's.. strange to complain about something that was to be expected after ten books, considering we know how much SE likes to change voices and to not care about whether the story pleases us or not.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Im sorry to beat a dead horse here, but I don't know what kind of humor people would prefer to the humor that was present. Was the Spite/Envy/Malice parts not funny? True, dark as all hell, but it was leaps and bounds better than, I don't know, Death Becomes Her, for lack of a better piece of crap. The previously mentioned jaghut parts were funny in their own way, and that wasn't just some made up thing as we've seen their humor before.In the end, the book was supposed to mirror the great tragedies and it does, while also having enough relief to not cheapen the actual tragedies. I cannot tell you how much I enjoyed Forge of Darkness. As a reward for being a patient reader, it was payoff through and through, and I just don't think that a lack of humor in a book that is specifically trying to shift tone should in any way count against it.

[nacht]

This is actually a beautiful book. The writing is elegant and the story is not forced. I felt it was a lot better than TCG (which I felt was too complicated :-))
I read it twice and the second read felt like a symphony. For example, the first time I read it I really did not appreciate the Narad viewpoint. It was some insignificant character whining about this and that. Who wants to read about the opinion of weaklings.
The second time I read it, I got it. It was the voice of conscience from an insignificant person who still has a share in the evil that happened but is now on a path to redemption. It is a viewpoint that is not commonly tackled in "hero" narratives.

Humor can not be forced as otherwise it will effect the narrative. I think SE is the master of balancing it. For example, the interaction between Tehol and Bugg is classic but within the narrative. (If there is one guy in the whole world who would have an Elder god as a servant, that would be Tehol)
There is plenty of good inline humour involving the Jaghut and especially Korya.

Beyond that the Tiste as a race are inclined towards introspection, prone to getting depressed and letting their imagination run into pondering negative outcomes, in some ways mirroring Draconus. It is quite an achievement for an author to create this kind of a mood throughout the book. The effect is quite subtle.

For example, you can feel this when you read the Feren narrative. It is not the perspective of fucking is fun (which probably would be the standard perspective of a lot of readers). It is needy and gulit laden. She knows that there will never be love in the relationship with Arathan and she is using him. Also, her relationship with her brother is very sensitive potrayal of a brother sister relationship. To impart the subtleties of this relationship to a reader through words is an amazing achievement. Even Hish Tulla, so well regarded by others is beset by doubts.

And of course there is revelation of the past, the Azathanai, the Jaghut, Mother Dark and so on. It is an incredible achievement to create this level of consistency across a whole series..

[D'rek]

The OP was making the point that (s)he felt the book had two much message preaching, and that witty banter was just one aspect of characterization and storytelling (s)he felt was missing compared to before. I totally agree, and think some people in this thread are being deliberately obtuse in their responses.

[tiam]

The book focuses mainly on the tiste who havnt exactly been a barrel of laughs throughout the main arc. What malazan banter weve seen was strictly the dark grim marine humour common to professional soldiers throughout this book. There were few strictly soldier pov sections and those we did see had scatterings of banter.it was the nature of those soldiers aswell, they were opportunistic rapers and bandits for the most part disgruntled at the diminuitive place in a society the fought and died to protect. The book had humour in other sections but the tone of this book drained alot of humour. Haut gothos korya even some azathanai banter was amusing but the main arc of this book was centred around a woman being gang raped on her wedding day by over a score of people. That was the resolution not a side plot like in moi but the main thrust and turning point of the book.

[blackzoid]

Jean-Claude Van tiam, on 28 January 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

The book focuses mainly on the tiste who havnt exactly been a barrel of laughs throughout the main arc. What malazan banter weve seen was strictly the dark grim marine humour common to professional soldiers throughout this book. There were few strictly soldier pov sections and those we did see had scatterings of banter.it was the nature of those soldiers aswell, they were opportunistic rapers and bandits for the most part disgruntled at the diminuitive place in a society the fought and died to protect. The book had humour in other sections but the tone of this book drained alot of humour. Haut gothos korya even some azathanai banter was amusing but the main arc of this book was centred around a woman being gang raped on her wedding day by over a score of people. That was the resolution not a side plot like in moi but the main thrust and turning point of the book.

I would argue that the cannabalistic points of interest covered in MOI are hardly a laugh riot either. And FoD was in full whinge mood long before the rape came along.
Its hard to deny that there has been a marked increase in whinging as the series went along. GoTM -DG- MOI, mostly action and less whinging. HoC -TBH, about equal action/whinging. RG-TTH-DOD mostly whinging with less sequences where people just got shit done. TCG is odd in that is seems to strike back to HoC/MT levels. FOD is almost all whinging. I would place a good bet that factually at least 90% of every FOD POV scene started with a whinge and mostly covers the POV subject working through that mental whinge-idea

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 28 January 2013 - 09:21 PM

[Spoilsport Stonny]

D, on 28 January 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

The OP was making the point that (s)he felt the book had two much message preaching, and that witty banter was just one aspect of characterization and storytelling (s)he felt was missing compared to before. I totally agree, and think some people in this thread are being deliberately obtuse in their responses.

Yes, you are correct as pertains to the OP, but the second person came back with something else. I am not being obtuse on purpose, but I am tempted to cast you down with the sodomites.

[worry]

Remember that Jaghut whose wiener was so long that his loin cloth didn't cover but half of it? That's basically all I asked for after TCG, and FOD served it up raw and ready. You won't catch me whinging about that, I tell you what. Everything else was just icing on the cake.

[D'rek]

Jean-Claude Van tiam, on 28 January 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

The book focuses mainly on the tiste who havnt exactly been a barrel of laughs throughout the main arc. What malazan banter weve seen was strictly the dark grim marine humour common to professional soldiers throughout this book. There were few strictly soldier pov sections and those we did see had scatterings of banter.it was the nature of those soldiers aswell, they were opportunistic rapers and bandits for the most part disgruntled at the diminuitive place in a society the fought and died to protect. The book had humour in other sections but the tone of this book drained alot of humour. Haut gothos korya even some azathanai banter was amusing but the main arc of this book was centred around a woman being gang raped on her wedding day by over a score of people. That was the resolution not a side plot like in moi but the main thrust and turning point of the book.

a} I would argue that the Tiste we see in GotM/MoI/TtH who have lived for 300 000 years should not necessarily act with the very same world weariness as when they had only lived for a few centuries, or in many cases only for a few decades.

b} Engrossing characters != witty banter. I believe the OP was lamenting the lack of the first (in their opinion), using the second as an example, but everyone in this thread seems to have read it as the OP saying the second was required for the first.

[Puck]

blackzoid, on 28 January 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

I would argue that the cannabalistic points of interest covered in MOI are hardly a laugh riot either. And FoD was in full whinge mood long before the rape came along.
Its hard to deny that there has been a marked increase in whinging as the series went along. GoTM -DG- MOI, mostly action and less whinging. HoC -TBH, about equal action/whinging. RG-TTH-DOD mostly whinging with less sequences where people just got shit done. TCG is odd in that is seems to strike back to HoC/MT levels. FOD is almost all whinging. I would place a good bet that factually at least 90% of every FOD POV scene started with a whinge and mostly covers the POV subject working through that mental whinge-idea

Thing is, what you call whinging, I call good characterization, so it's - again - down to personal preferences. But so far, in this thread, those who are, well, pro-Fod, so to say, are the ones explaining why they think it's good, as opposed to those who just say 'too much whining, not enough lulz'.

[blackzoid]

I'm saying that the ratio for whining/doing things without having a mental masturbation philosophy session is way off in this book. If a single character does that, its good characterisation. Yes. If EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER does it for EVERY SINGLE POV SCENE...not so much. Once its good characterisation. Every time, its institutionalised whinging on the planet Wu. Somehow many great characters in literature don't go down to the shops to get milk without having an extensional crisis to do it, as that essentially happens in this book for almost every minor scene. It seems as if SE would prefer to write a philosophy trilogy with some action scenes. Nothing wrong with that, thats his choice, but it becomes ...exhausting and repetitive to have to plow through at least 2-3 pages of whinging before a character does something in their pov scene.

Again, I don't mind "mental whinging" as I put it (I personally though Corabb's thoughts in TBH were the best example of such) , but not every time for every character. Sure I'm exaggerating, but not by much. Balance means some characters can do things without worrying about society and how an action pertains to society's undoing and stuff.

There, I think I've adequately explained my opinion. Its simply a case of comparing the POV philosophy quotient per scene in FOD to an earlier book like DG or MOI.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 29 January 2013 - 10:53 AM

[Uptoolate]

Sorry I've been away a couple of days but having the chance to read through all of your replies has honestly been a pleasure. First off I don't want to discredit this story in anyway, if I left that impression I apologize, I was trying to work out my own personal issues, and honestly maybe even looking for people to prove me wrong. That's why I've been a reader of this site for years, though this is the first time I've felt like I needed help.
I do find it funny that so many of you focused on me having an issue with the lack of humour, this may have been an error of my description, though I noticed many of u caught this wasn't my focus. I used examples of many of the great partnerships of the series when lamenting the lack of these back and forths. What I forgot to mention was my favorite scene in the entire series is rake and whiskey jack sitting in the tant talking about quick Ben. The back and forth of these amazing characters is amazing, but its these convos that reveal history and depth that meant the most. Now don't get me wrong, I loved the convos of FoD that did this, and once again don't get me wrong there were many.... Buttttt....
As the original ten books went on there were more and more instances when I knew I was digesting a message, sometimes one that was relevant, sometimes not. I spent years with these characters, and though I found it weird that SEE would expect I wouldn't understand why my favorite characters were doing what they were doing, I was more than happy to have him take me through the ride. Now here's the part I feel like I'm getting in trouble for... When I read this book there were so many spots that were so exciting to read, like errastas binding the warrens, the naming of grief, and the path laid for hood.
The issue I'll try to explain better is the constant need for a message. When we all heard about a kharkanas trilogy I'm sure we were all chomping at the bit for all of the history we were going to learn. Don't get me wrong there were a lot of great things I learnt in some very small sections. The issue I had was with the 25 other pages I had to read about some moral issue to earn it.
I read an interview that SE said he was trying to do a little more of a traditional fantasy novel. I'm fine with that, and honestly I love a good message, it's one of the reasons I love SE so much, I just don't want to be smacked in the face I'm reading another two page commentary about some social incompetence. At least let me pretend I'm smart and I sorted it out on my own... Especially through re-read after re-read, seriously I have highlighter marks in my books.
I apologize for the spelling and grammatical errors, it's hard proof reading on an iPad mini.
I honestly look forward to ur responses.

[Uptoolate]

blackzoid said:

1359456762[/url]' post='1027418']
I'm saying that the ratio for whining/doing things without having a mental masturbation philosophy session is way off in this book. If a single character does that, its good characterisation. Yes. If EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER does it for EVERY SINGLE POV SCENE...not so much. Once its good characterisation. Every time, its institutionalised whinging on the planet Wu. Somehow many great characters in literature don't go down to the shops to get milk without having an extensional crisis to do it, as that essentially happens in this book for almost every minor scene. It seems as if SE would prefer to write a philosophy trilogy with some action scenes. Nothing wrong with that, thats his choice, but it becomes ...exhausting and repetitive to have to plow through at least 2-3 pages of whinging before a character does something in their pov scene.

Again, I don't mind "mental whinging" as I put it (I personally though Corabb's thoughts in TBH were the best example of such) , but not every time for every character. Sure I'm exaggerating, but not by much. Balance means some characters can do things without worrying about society and how an action pertains to society's undoing and stuff.

There, I think I've adequately explained my opinion. Its simply a case of comparing the POV philosophy quotient per scene in FOD to an earlier book like DG or MOI.

I just want to add this as an example of exactly what I was talking about. Thanks for chiming in.