[Coldsnap]

I cant seem to use this thing enough... sorry if its annoying!

So i keep getting humbled by how brilliant Erkison can be with these little philosophical statements or monologues by characters, and because of the intensity of the story, the predicaments these characters find themselves in, and how well weve all gotten to know them... the point is driven across so much stronger than just reading some lame philosophy text book, lacking any sort of emotionally charged context to propel the idea.

He can do elaborate ones, like Tehols hilarious but searing analysis of wealth and poverty and the necessity for class divisions and such... and its brilliant, but another level of the brilliance is how he plays the convo out, answering and criticizing his own statements speaking for both himself and for Bugg! In fact, almost all of Tehols and Bugg dialogue beats most of the philosophy ive ever read just by having a genuine liking and interest for the characters and their situation. Its almost shakespearian.

And then subtle ones, like in Deadhouse Gates, Duiker says: Children are dying, and Lull explains how all injustices of the world can be summarized in those three simple words.

I know there are a lot, but damn if this guy isint phenomenol at what he does!

I find myself, now having read all the books, looking back at some of the most profound conversations and interactions, having a better understanding of the characters involved... Rake in Gardens of the moon,... anything Whiskeyjack... the whole battle at Pale... that scene at the start with whiskeyjack and lasseen and a young Paran. Brood, Crone dialogue, Shadowthrone stuff... KRUPPE! Anyone find themselves in this situation?

[paladin]

i think that tehol/bugg, kuppe, and some of the others are great at having hilarious but relevant conversation... the only other philosophical comparison i have is r scott bakker in the prince of nothing series and his stuff was very textbook boring like. erikson definately does it well, even if it might not be a new idea or deep

[Coldsnap]

TOTALLY!!! I couldnt agree more, Paladin. I read those ones too, a while back, and ya, fairly dry but really philosophical. I actually thought i read somewhere that Bakker and Erikson know each other!

[Where is Dassem Ultor?]

Erikson's ability to slip in his own philosophical ramblings (if I don't butcher them by describing them thus) is, in part, responsible for my existence on these forums. His is an unerring ability; one that seamlessly switches between narrating a vast swath of characters as their storylines intertwine, and giving life to these characters....far beyond the archetypal caricatures that have come to dominate popular fantasy. I was drawn in: hook, line, and sinker...and was drawn to find others like me; others who were not only fascinated by his storytelling abilities, but by his characters and their inestimably wise monologues.

[Coldsnap]

That response, in and of itself, was pretty damn cool, if you dont mind me saying so, brother! Cheers to like minded strangers!

[Shield Anvil]

Sometime I read a review on SE and the reviewer said something along the lines of "Reading SE changes the way you see things blaha-blaha". Now, it sounds like a hell-of-a cliché but in some aspects I agree. All these small philosophical inlays makes one thinking and it makes the reading even more worth it, despite fantastic chars, setting, plot, etc.

Heck, I got SE quotations on my wall.

[Gem Windcaster]

Coldsnap;165101 said:

Its almost shakespearian.

I couldn't agree more

I've said as much in another thread. Especially MT was like that.
It is almost eerie. I have a new thing to be fanatical about. I know
not everyone holds SE as the best fantasy writer out there - but
I would - even though there are some just as good. I still would
choose SE's books for re-reads most of the time over any other
author. I think it has to do with liking Sci-fi. There are so many elements
that reminds me of Sci-fi classics in SE's books. Among other things.