SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Tj wrote: "..."

TJ, I appreciate your call for civility, and admit that I used some "passionate" language in my comments, but I also offered specific examples and have tried to keep the discussion focused on my original points.

In addition (new topic for conversation), I believe that once an author is published, they are fair game for criticism. That is a well established model. The author is given the opportunity to express themselves(their Art) with great care and deliberation, putting their ideas into the public sphere, for better or worse. And if the public finds the author to be racist or sexist, or dishonest, or any number of things, I think it is only fair for the public to express their reaction.

The mantle of "author" should not convey critical immunity upon a person. A flawed work can be critiqued in standalone fashion as merely poor work, but it can also reflect clearly (and negatively) upon the author as an individual.

For example, Tolkien is sometimes criticized for the racial presentation of LotR, and sometimes defended as being a product of his environment. I think it is valuable to continue having these discussions, even after the author's death, to look beyond the book at the reality that produced it.

Thoughts?

I apologize for the "troll" comment--which was not directed at your "opinion," but at the fact that you talked about not liking the elements of fantasy which make it speculative. Which made me wonder (not accusatory) why you'd even read this type of fiction, let alone comment on it.

I loved the whole Dickensian element in Rothfuss's The Name of the Wind , but, it didn't make me think he was plagiarizing Dickens.

Rich wrote: "I loved the whole Dickensian element..."

That's a great point. Rothfuss resurrects that peculiar Dickensian perspective on poverty and childhood and urban life, but delivers it in a story with much greater scope and imagination (huzzah for Fantasy!).

This is one of the great strengths of the genre, to capture powerful human stories and emotions but deliver them in a new manner that doesn't feel entirely familiar.

Question - Did you like the frame of the story, with Kvothe telling his own story like a giant flashback? I thought it ruined some of the tension because we know right from the start that he survives, intact, and he becomes powerful, but ends up in the exciting world of inn-keeping. It might be more compelling if he was dying in a dungeon or ruling the world, but when you know that the end of the story is middle-class suburbia, doesn't it kill the drama a little?

I find it interesting that people are using WoT as the whipping boy for ripping off LoR. After the first book or two the whole thing is so far removed from LoR that the argument is fruitless. I think that the biggest LoR rip-off that I have ever read is The Sword of Shannara.

We have two companions who must leave their village undetected (Sam and Frodo). They meet up with a druid (Gandalf) who guides them through their quest which entails them taking a sword (ring) into the enemy realm (Mordor) which is the only thing that can defeat the dark lord (sauron). It's been 20 years since I read it so I am sure that other people can provide more detail and comparisons.

As mentioned earlier it is important to note that Tolkien created LoR to give us (the British) a saga akin the great Norse saga's such as Beowulf. He drew a lot of inspiration from there.

If I think about how RPGs classify fantasy settings we have 'low' and 'high' fantasy. 'High' fantasy deals in epic quests in which the heroes and heroines hold the fate of their nations if not their world in their hands. LoR, WoT and the Sword of Shannara easily fit into this classification. In a very basic manner all 'high' fantasy is the same - the only real difference is in the details but at the end of the day they all feel the same.

'Low' fantasy is where things feel different. This deals with the nitty gritty of survival in a very personal sense. The actions have consequences on a small scale - a farmer does not have his sheep rustled, the heroes manage to get themselves something to eat and drink for the next few days. It is simpler to create a story which does not feel like another when creating a 'low' fantasy story.

Joseph wrote: "when you know that the end of the story is middle-class suburbia, doesn't it kill the drama a little?"

No, because they're clearly setting up some kind of major event to climax the series. All this 'my life history up to now' stuff is setting that up, but I expect whatever healing process he's going through will have that as a keystone.

Marc wrote: "No, because they're clearly setting up some kind of major event to climax the ..."

Sure, but most series have a big climax. Half the fun is getting there. I'm just not sure what Rothfuss is adding to the mix by giving us a look at the adult Kvothe.

I mean, I want to keep reading to find out what happens to young Kvothe because he's a compelling character, but I'm not reading because I want to find out how/why a wizard-warrior-bard becomes an innkeeper. I'd rather not know that he has this lull between his career and the climax, whatever that is.

Joseph wrote: "Sure, but most series have a big climax. Half the fun is getting there. I'm just not sure what Rot..."

Clearly he went through a lot of crap in his life, probably did some things he didn't want to but had to anyway, got left scarred, battered, and dispirited, retired to the inn and found that his adventures weren't over. My character Joseph Marquand is like that, except without two books full of backstory.

Not really sure what most of this has to do with SoT...

True Kim. This all started with one person asking opinions about SOT and it got compared to other fantasy series and this spiraled out into a huge debate! I just hope the original poster was able to make a decision on whether or not to read Goodkind's series. Again, it had me entranced and I highly recommend it, however as displayed here sometimes you just need to see for yourself if you like it or not!

Joseph wrote: "Rich wrote: "I loved the whole Dickensian element..."

That's a great point. Rothfuss resurrects that peculiar Dickensian perspective on poverty and childhood and urban life, but delivers it in a s..."

I think The Name of the Wind needs it's own thread, but, the frame story could end with his death--the chronicler leaves that possible--so, we don't know if he does survive. The jury is still out on it.

It took me far too long to find this quote:

"Tolkien appears in the fantasy universe in the same way that Mount Fuji appeared in old Japanese prints. Sometimes small, in the distance, and sometimes big and close-to, and sometimes not there at all, and that's because the artist is standing on Mount Fuji."

-- Terry Pratchett

Tolkien has been a major influence on fantasy writers. I usually don't have a big problem with people drawing on him for inspiration, so long as the writing style is interesting.

I'm far from qualified to argue the literary quality of any of these books, but as someone who reads simply to be entertained I found Goodkind's writing to be entirely too "preachy" Soon after the first book, I felt like I was being none-too-subtly recruited to Goodkind's strange world views to the point that it overshadowed the actual characters and storyline.

Donna wrote: "I'm far from qualified to argue the literary quality of any of these books, but as someone who reads simply to be entertained I found Goodkind's writing to be entirely too "preachy" Soon after the ..."

Donna, did you get the feeling that the author had run out of good story ideas after the first book? Authors often have lots of time to develop their first book, and then the publisher begins demanding sequels on a schedule. Maybe Goodkind needed more time to develop the stories in his sequels.

Donna wrote: "I'm far from qualified to argue the literary quality of any of these books, but as someone who reads simply to be entertained I found Goodkind's writing to be entirely too "preachy" Soon after the ..."

I also became uncomfortable with Goodkind's fascination, almost love of torture. It added nothing to the storyline eventually and simply was excess and unhealty imho.

Donna wrote: "I'm far from qualified to argue the literary quality of any of these books, but as someone who reads simply to be entertained I found Goodkind's writing to be entirely too "preachy" Soon after the ..."

I had the same problem with how preachy he got. If I wanted to read political commentary I would have bought a book from one of the many political fanatics out there. I bought the books to be entertained and after the first book I became increasingly disappointed, to the point where finally I just quit reading.

I read the SoT series this past year, and I found it to be entertaining. The first book was undoubtedly the best, although I really enjoyed Temple of the Winds (#4) too, probably because Cara had some great scenes in it. Forget Richard and Kahlan... Cara was the best character to come from that series.

I noticed the "preachy" parts in the later books, but I skimmed through them looking for the next scene of Cara badassery.

Emily wrote: "I read the SoT series this past year, and I found it to be entertaining. The first book was undoubtedly the best, although I really enjoyed Temple of the Winds (#4) too, probably because Cara had s..."

I agree with you Emily and was really crushed when the series finally came to an end. That was until about a month ago when I was reading that Terry Goodkind has decided to return to Sword of Truth series. A new book should be coming out within the year I believe. Yeaaa More Cara.....

I think they are referring the Richard and Kahlan Story that is coming out next year. It's called "The Omen Machine"

Here it is: The Omen Machine: A Richard and Kahlan Novel.

Chris wrote: "Here it is: The Omen Machine: A Richard and Kahlan Novel.

"

This was in fact what I was taking about. I struggle with the The Law of Nine. I am excited about his 12th Richard and Kahlan book.

That cover looks like someone vomited on it.