Dean Koontz Gone Fundy

[The_Serpent]

BTW I was in my 20's when I read it ...

See and I was 11. World of difference. I don't think I could read it now without seeing all the flaws inherent in what was Card's first significant novel. But I don't begrudge him that really. I would say that as his career went on, the quality of his writing and characters has improved while the stories and ideas behind them have not is my general impression of his work, especially given the proselytizing (sp?). However I still have a positive impression of Ender's game as a fun romp about a smart kid who is picked on.. which in many ways mirrors my own young life at the time I read it.

 

[Morrigan]

Realism one can possibly think of as an objective measure. Credibility IMO is firmly in the eye of the beholder. The fact that you find R.R. Martin credible says more about you than it does the book. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with Martin's violent, depressing, cynical style, it's just not my cup of tea. The only fantasy series I can stand remains The lord of the Rings.

Not really, you could argue that both are subjective, but that both can based judged on objective standards.
Martin's world is violent, depressing and cynical because that is what a feudal world ravaged by war and poverty IS. You could argue that the degree is too extreme, or not extreme enough, and that would be subjective. But we can all agree that pretty princess and pretty princes and happy flowers in La-la land do not accurately reflect a medieval world, yes?

Here's one small example of a thing that is not realistic about Martin's world: the heraldry. Even while I found the sheer number of banners and blazons and symbols semi-confusing at first, even now I realize that real-world medieval heraldry was far more complicated. The noble houses and their vassals and heraldry is kept at a minimum: it looks high to maintain a semblance of credibility, but when compared to the real history of Europe, in England alone it was already far more complex.
But Martin wants to tell a story, not just build a world, so he kept it straightforward enough to allow us to sort through the families and follow their story. Is the heraldry realistic? Not much, though compared to most fantasy, it is. Is it credible enough to make me think of actual historical knights and houses, rather than imaginary fairy tale knights? Yes.

Credibility is important because it allows the reader (not counting children) to empathise, and sympathise, with the characters and the events. It's very hard to take Feist seriously when his wizard (Pug) and warrior (Tomas) are all invincible munchkins who travel through various dimensions to kick everyone's ass. If at least he had a mythological dimension to his writing, it could redeem him, but no... it's just a very insipid story about very one-dimensional characters. Like Ender's Game as well.

Which I found boring. But hey, to each their own. On a related note, I have decided to recommend Song of ice and fire to my friend because of this discussion. He too loved Dune, romanticises war and finds convoluted political machinations compelling somehow. Whatever floats your boat =):

You like Ender's Game but dislike Dune...? I'm afraid there is no hope for you. Let me guess, you like Dude Where's My Car but don't like One Flew Over a Cuckoo's Nest because it's "boring"?
Dune is a work of art. It's not just the plots, but all the thematics and the cultural awareness... I hate novels that philosophise endlessly, and I didn't like God-Emperor much because it detracted from the story. But the first two, and the last two, are epic journeys of humanity.

 

[supercorgi]

Realism one can possibly think of as an objective measure. Credibility IMO is firmly in the eye of the beholder. The fact that you find R.R. Martin credible says more about you than it does the book. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with Martin's violent, depressing, cynical style, it's just not my cup of tea.

I think Martin is quite a good writer. His Fire and Ice series is excellent medivalesque fantasy. It's not your standard fantasy which usually involves some sort of quest. His world is patterned after medieval Europe with political intrigues, power plays, and conflict. Is is rather grim but so was life in the middle ages. The characters are very well developed and believable. I also admire that he's not afraid to kill off main characters.

The only fantasy series I can stand remains The lord of the Rings.

So you like traditional quest fantasies. I do too. But I find Martin's work refreshing because it's not traditional. It's more like reading a good historical fiction but has elements of fantasy with mythical creatures thrown in. It's not your standard human, dwarf, elf quest fantasy.

 

[The_Serpent]

Martin's world is violent, depressing and cynical because that is what a feudal world ravaged by war and poverty IS.

The author chooses the characters, setting and plot. That he would consistently chose deliberately overly violent, depressing, cynical stories simply shows what kind of person he is. I didn't enjoy it. I don't really enjoy any fantasy any more, I tried reading Robert Jordan and Mr. Martin on recommendations and found both to be virtually unreadable.

You like Ender's Game but dislike Dune...? I'm afraid there is no hope for you. Let me guess, you like Dude Where's My Car but don't like One Flew Over a Cuckoo's Nest because it's "boring"?

I hope you understand this style of argument is known as 'ad hominem' and is more properly used at a playground than a forum. I never said I like Dude where is my car or anything like it. That you would imply that if I don't like what you like then I must like garbage says more about your level of emotional development than my taste eh?

 

[The_Serpent]

I think Martin is quite a good writer.

I don't think he is a bad writer. I just dont like his stuff.

So you like traditional quest fantasies. I do too. But I find Martin's work refreshing because it's not traditional. It's more like reading a good historical fiction but has elements of fantasy with mythical creatures thrown in. It's not your standard human, dwarf, elf quest fantasy.

Once I did. Like Ender's game I read the Lord of the rings in middle school in Venezuela. It was a really neat epic with a very fully imagined world, if filled with somewhat shallow characters and few women of consequence. But hey, I was a boy at the time and didn't know better. Do I still like it despite its flaws just like I like Ender's game? Absolutely! Do I find any modern fantasy I have read compelling, even though I have tried many times to read it over the past decade? Nope. Heck, even most of the Scifi I've read has been bad. I still can't understand what was up with Vernor Vinge's Fire upon the Deep.. That book was terrible!

 

[Morrigan]

The author chooses the characters, setting and plot. That he would consistently chose deliberately overly violent, depressing, cynical stories simply shows what kind of person he is.

I'm sorry, but that's unbelievably stupid.

I didn't enjoy it. I don't really enjoy any fantasy any more, I tried reading Robert Jordan and Mr. Martin on recommendations and found both to be virtually unreadable.

Jordan and Martin have little in common, actually, and I'm a Jordan hater myself. But, whatever, it's too bad you don't like it, but I stand by the fact that your initial comment in this post is unbelievably stupid.
It also seems you completely glossed over my entire post about believable settings. Oh, well.

I hope you understand this style of argument is known as 'ad hominem' and is more properly used at a playground than a forum. I never said I like Dude where is my car or anything like it. That you would imply that if I don't like what you like then I must like garbage says more about your level of emotional development than my taste eh?

No, it simply means you need to grow a sense of humour (or invest in a new irony detector maybe), and maybe some thick skin. Like your friend Ender, maybe.

 

[Floyt]

Originally Posted by The_Serpent:

The author chooses the characters, setting and plot. That he would consistently chose deliberately overly violent, depressing, cynical stories simply shows what kind of person he is.

I'm sorry, but that's unbelievably stupid.

Care to elaborate on that?
I guess this at least shows you've never tried your hand at writing a story of any length (say, above novella size). To KEEP UP the complex, dark tone Martin has chosen over the course of a multi-thousand page story requires immense tuning and dedication. It doesn't "just happen" because it's realistic for the chosen setting (which is debatable - a benevolent faerie-tale atmosphere would suit the setting just as well). It might not actually show what kind of person Martin is, but it DOES show a conscious choice in style.

 

[Floyt]

Dune is a work of art. It's not just the plots, but all the thematics and the cultural awareness... I hate novels that philosophise endlessly, and I didn't like God-Emperor much because it detracted from the story. But the first two, and the last two, are epic journeys of humanity.

...told using a 2000 word vocabulary. Which is why I went straight back to Iain Banks for space opera

 

[Morrigan]

Care to elaborate on that?
I guess this at least shows you've never tried your hand at writing a story of any length (say, above novella size). To KEEP UP the complex, dark tone Martin has chosen over the course of a multi-thousand page story requires immense tuning and dedication. It doesn't "just happen" because it's realistic for the chosen setting (which is debatable - a benevolent faerie-tale atmosphere would suit the setting just as well). It might not actually show what kind of person Martin is, but it DOES show a conscious choice in style.

I fail to see what Martin's dedication to his work has to do with what kind of person he is, which IS what The_Serpent says.

I suppose every musician who plays dark and evil and violent music are also dark, angry and violent and evil.

 

[The_Serpent]

It might not actually show what kind of person Martin is, but it DOES show a conscious choice in style.

Fair enough, I agree that the ability to choose a voice for a novel that is distinct from your own is much of the art of writing (though not always recommended). I would also say that when I mentioned before that Martin's morbid style is consistent I didn't just mean within a single novel or even across the Song series. See any of his works, but his first novel The dying of the light is an excellent example.

I want to mention again that I don't think Martin is a bad writer or even a mediocre one. He certainly sells well and he has many ardent fans. I can only hope to sell as well with the Military Sci fi novel I am currently working on. The same could of course be said for the sales and accolades earned by Ender's Game. Martin's stuff just isn't my cup of tea.

 

[antihippy]

I see I am not the only person who sees problems with Martin's writing.

For the record I like his fire and ice books.

The problem I have with them is that they are going a bit "wheel of time". It seems that the books are being extended out for no good reason (money? infamy? fame?). Personally I believe he could have edited the last two books together and made one cracking read; instead of the 2 overlong books we have instead. As it is it appears that Martin has been killing off characters for no good reason other than "shock value".
Read enough medieval-esque writing and you come to realise that Martin's work is not even all-that groundbreaking.

And I do believe that there are better fantasy novels out there.

Then again debating taste has always struck me as slightly pointless - and so cynical me realises [too late] that he's just wasted the last 2 minutes of typing.

 

[Floyt]

Fair enough, I agree that the ability to choose a voice for a novel that is distinct from your own is much of the art of writing (though not always recommended). I would also say that when I mentioned before that Martin's morbid style is consistent I didn't just mean within a single novel or even across the Song series. See any of his works, but his first novel The dying of the light is an excellent example.

Dunno, I found the "Tuf Voyaging" stories downright fluffy
Well, some of them at any rate. "Plague Star" is just rollicking good fun.

Since we are well off the rails anyway... what's your specific objection to "A Fire upon the Deep"? I'm usually recommending that book just for the lovely "Tines" idea, let alone Zones of Thought and interstellar email logs! (gosh, got to re-read that sometime soon I notice...)

 

[Morrigan]

I would also say that when I mentioned before that Martin's morbid style is consistent I didn't just mean within a single novel or even across the Song series. See any of his works, but his first novel The dying of the light is an excellent example.

There was nothing morbid about this novel. I'd agree with Fevre Dream, it's morbid, but it IS an horror story for crying out loud. And what about Windhaven?

I suppose Lovecraft, writing morbid tales of horror, nightmares and supernatural stuff as he does, was probably deeply into dark occult stuff... oh wait, he was an atheist. Oops.

I want to mention again that I don't think Martin is a bad writer or even a mediocre one. He certainly sells well and he has many ardent fans. I can only hope to sell as well with the Military Sci fi novel I am currently working on. The same could of course be said for the sales and accolades earned by Ender's Game. Martin's stuff just isn't my cup of tea.

I'm not sure why you try to associate quality with sales or praises from plebians.

 

[Morrigan]

The problem I have with them is that they are going a bit "wheel of time". It seems that the books are being extended out for no good reason (money? infamy? fame?). Personally I believe he could have edited the last two books together and made one cracking read; instead of the 2 overlong books we have instead.

What "two overlong books"? Feast was rather short, yet so much happened in it. Your comparison to WoT is ridiculous. Martin's pacing has hardly suffered, and each chapter actually has important events happening, unlike WoT which has dragged on and on and on and on from books 7-10. Even if Feast's pacing was not as good as A Storm of Swords, it was still wayyyyyyyy upbar Jordan's crap.

As it is it appears that Martin has been killing off characters for no good reason other than "shock value".

Not really. Why would you say it's only shock value? Every death so far has been integral to the plot. The most shocking deaths were Ned's and Robb's, and they surrounded very important events. Sure they were shocking... it's always so when we lose characters we love. But Martin simply reminds us that no one is safe, and also, every death of major characters (Ned, Robb, Drogo, Renly, Jeor Mormont, Oberyn) have played very important roles and changed everything that had been happening. He doesn't kill them off for no reason.

Read enough medieval-esque writing and you come to realise that Martin's work is not even all-that groundbreaking.

You fail to provide examples, but no one claimed anything about Martin being "groundbreaking". In any case, as far as modern fantasy goes he certainly is far above the rest.

And I do believe that there are better fantasy novels out there.

You said so in the "fantasy with female leads" thread. I asked for examples, and you failed to provide any. Surprise, surprise.

 

[Floyt]

Aaahhh, nothing like being confrontational in matters of taste...

 

[antihippy]

You said so in the "fantasy with female leads" thread. I asked for examples, and you failed to provide any. Surprise, surprise.

You are obviously a Martin Fan-Person (let's not get specific about gender until I know for sure), I see little point in entering into a bun-fight with someone who appears to have an agenda.

You fail to provide examples, but no one claimed anything about Martin being "groundbreaking". In any case, as far as modern fantasy goes he certainly is far above the rest.

But if you insist ...

If you are not interested in something 'different' (although perhaps I did make a poor choice in my use of 'groundbreaking') then why should anyone bother trying to offer up different authors to read? My contention is that Martin is not the great fantasy author that people like you seem to assert he is. There is nothing inherently wrong with what he writes, but is written in a style that's been done lots of times before.

How about China Meiville?

Or if it is only medieval-esque settings you prefer:

Or KJ Parker?
Or Paul Kearney? Even if I thought that the last Monarchies of God was too short...
Or even Robin Hobb?

There are probably a few others I've forgotten about - I'm at work with no access to my bookshelves.

I suppose it could also depend on how you define "fantasy". There are some Space Operas which cross over into the realms of 'fantasy'. Olympos springs to mind.

As even I pointed out above; I have read and enjoyed Martin's books I just see what all the fuss is about.

 

[antihippy]

IN any case it's a matter of taste...

 

[Floyt]

... therefore it behooves a Person of Quality to discuss said Matters with Dignity and Measure (as you and The_Serpent do). We ain't on the bloody Isle of Dogs here, whut?

I must say that to me, Martin actually seemed to do a pretty groundbreaking thing with his gritty, no-holds-barred treatment of protagonists. Didn't see that one before - usually if a viewpoint character snuffs it, it's a traumatic twist at the end or a prologue device. Differently inventive than what Mieville does with the use of language, certainly.

(edited to clarify)

 

[The_Serpent]

A fire upon..uh..something.

Since we are well off the rails anyway... what's your specific objection to "A Fire upon the Deep"?

That book has been mostly lost from my memory unfortunately other than a generalized dislike so you won't get any truly specific objections. The only thing I remember that I liked was the doglike aliens and their group/pack consciousness. I remember that I felt the human characters were tacked on. I also remember feeling like I was slogging through mountains of text waiting to get back to the portion of the storyline I felt was interesting.

 

[Morrigan]

You are obviously a Martin Fan-Person (let's not get specific about gender until I know for sure), I see little point in entering into a bun-fight with someone who appears to have an agenda.

Um, what? In the other thread, I asked for examples because I said I was "genuinely curious".
Yes, I'm a Martin fan, that doesn't mean I only like him, that I'm blind, irrational or narrow-minded. I just happen to think he's the best fantasy author out there right now. I guess that gives me an agenda.

But if you insist ...

If you are not interested in something 'different' (although perhaps I did make a poor choice in my use of 'groundbreaking') then why should anyone bother trying to offer up different authors to read?

Where did I say that?? Why are you making things up?

My contention is that Martin is not the great fantasy author that people like you seem to assert he is. There is nothing inherently wrong with what he writes, but is written in a style that's been done lots of times before.

How about China Meiville?

Never heard. What does he write? Can you describe his works a little, or do you still think I'm having an agenda?

Or if it is only medieval-esque settings you prefer:

Or KJ Parker?
Or Paul Kearney? Even if I thought that the last Monarchies of God was too short...
Or even Robin Hobb?

I only know of Hobb among those. She's definitely great, one of my favourites. I would not say she's better than Martin, but... maybe second, really. Good stuff. If the other two authors are as good as her, I'm interested.

As even I pointed out above; I have read and enjoyed Martin's books I just see what all the fuss is about.

I'm assuming you meant to write that you DON'T see what the fuss is about... and as for myself, I have yet to read fantasy that is as cynical, bleak, realistic and believable as Martin's, plus his plots have really incredible and unpredictable twists. Also his attention to details is amazing. And I don't mean the description of chairs or low-cut dresses à la Jordan here, but rather details in the story and backstory. For a few examples: his subtle allusion to the Hound in Feast, the Alchemist and Jaqen H'ghar, Lyanna/Rhaegar/Jon, Loras/Renly, Lysa Arryn's abortion, Sarella == Alleras, Brienne's shield being Dunk's sigil, the dwarf "Nimble Dick" ending up as a victim of Cersei's dwarf hunt, Varys and Illyrio conspiring in the tunnels of the Red Keep, Jeyne Poole posing as Arya, all the references to Robert's rebellion coming in pieces from various POVs, references to Catelyn's "resurrection" in dreams and prophecies, and so on.
Also, I like how the prophecies come to pass in subtle or unexpected ways. In most fantasy, including Jordan, prophecies are almost always self-fulfilling (Aviendah, who hates Rand, sleeps with him because she foresaw she would; Tuon marries Mat because it was prophecy that they would; Min falls in love with Rand because she foresaw she would, etc etc.) or predictable, and it's irritating.