PDA

View Full Version : a song of ice and fire


Fin
01-26-2012, 09:37 PM
i was looking for something else to bide my time while waiting for amol to come out and i keep hearing reference to this series. Is it worth reading i do understand its a series if im not mistaken. thoughts if not any other fantasy books would be cool too.

Davian93
01-26-2012, 09:55 PM
i was looking for something else to bide my time while waiting for amol to come out and i keep hearing reference to this series. Is it worth reading i do understand its a series if im not mistaken. thoughts if not any other fantasy books would be cool too.

Yes, yes, a million times yes.

One word of caution: Take your time as he's been writing it since 1996 and he's only completed 5 books in that time. Its a great series...albeit one that is very adult (lots of explicit sex, blood, gore, etc.

Fin
01-26-2012, 10:06 PM
thats fine i used to read stephen king and was a huge tolkien fan way before all those folks jumped in on it. thats how i got to jordan found eotw at a buddies house read the prologue and went and bought book next day. i was looking up that a sixth book is in the works winds of winter or something like that. i shall have to see this

on a side note there is a tv series with sean bean i think called game of thrones on hbo is this related ?

Davian93
01-26-2012, 10:10 PM
thats fine i used to read stephen king and was a huge tolkien fan way before all those folks jumped in on it. thats how i got to jordan found eotw at a buddies house read the prologue and went and bought book next day. i was looking up that a sixth book is in the works winds of winter or something like that. i shall have to see this

on a side note there is a tv series with sean bean i think called game of thrones on hbo is this related ?

Yes, the tv series on HBO is the adaptation of Book 1. Season 2 starts in April and it covers Book 2 or at least a good chunk of book 2. Book 3 is supposedly going to take at least 2 seasons on HBO as its a huge tome of a book.

I'd put GRRM's writing up there as equal to RJ for quality fantasy writing. Its very dark at times but a fantastic read overall.

The HBO series is also very, very well done.

Fin
01-26-2012, 10:20 PM
definitely might have to check it out. on a side note i still want to see a silmarillion movie.

fdsaf3
01-27-2012, 09:47 AM
In my very humble opinion, the Ice and Fire series is kind of overrated. They aren't bad books by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't understand the fervent adoration some fans have for the series. It's not traditional fantasy by any stretch of the imagination, which is fine. I have broad tastes. To enjoy these books, you have to really (and I mean really) enjoy political intrigue. For some, it's just not their cup of tea.

Fin
01-27-2012, 06:16 PM
political intrigue suits me fine i mean theres plenty of it in wot i mean im just looking for a good series period that malazan series mentioned a few threads up looks good too and i know theres a like a bajillion dragonlance novels which i might try i dont know if any are related to the others or just same universe or whatnot

Davian93
01-27-2012, 07:21 PM
political intrigue suits me fine i mean theres plenty of it in wot i mean im just looking for a good series period that malazan series mentioned a few threads up looks good too and i know theres a like a bajillion dragonlance novels which i might try i dont know if any are related to the others or just same universe or whatnot

aSoIaF political intrigue>>>WoT political intrigue.

finn
01-28-2012, 02:26 AM
In my very humble opinion, the Ice and Fire series is kind of overrated. They aren't bad books by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't understand the fervent adoration some fans have for the series. It's not traditional fantasy by any stretch of the imagination, which is fine. I have broad tastes. To enjoy these books, you have to really (and I mean really) enjoy political intrigue. For some, it's just not their cup of tea.

Yes I have to agree though I've only read the first book. The author knows his craft as I finished it without taking any major breaks. The plot however was slow for my tastes and from what I've heard, the series continues at that plodding pace. It's less fantasy, more medieval intrigue & doesn't skip over the gory details.

Fin
01-28-2012, 08:27 PM
Yes I have to agree though I've only read the first book. The author knows his craft as I finished it without taking any major breaks. The plot however was slow for my tastes and from what I've heard, the series continues at that plodding pace. It's less fantasy, more medieval intrigue & doesn't skip over the gory details.
so what would be a suitable substitute?

Davian93
01-28-2012, 09:48 PM
Yes I have to agree though I've only read the first book. The author knows his craft as I finished it without taking any major breaks. The plot however was slow for my tastes and from what I've heard, the series continues at that plodding pace. It's less fantasy, more medieval intrigue & doesn't skip over the gory details.

Its fantasy...its just not High Fantasy (Tolkien) or D & D style fantasy. Its a very well crafted story with fantasy elements that become more pronounced as the books progress.

finn
01-30-2012, 01:25 PM
so what would be a suitable substitute?
Depends on what does suit your tastes. If you want a series that kills its characters, I had a better time with Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson but I haven't finished that yet.

Its fantasy...its just not High Fantasy (Tolkien) or D & D style fantasy. Its a very well crafted story with fantasy elements that become more pronounced as the books progress.

Yeah, I expect they would. Like I said, I only read the first one and it felt like a setup for future books in terms of plot and fantasy elements. And isn't this series technically High Fantasy though, being set in an invented world with its extreme summer / winter cycles? My impression was that it relegates its fantasy elements to the background, prologues & climaxes in favor of the more real struggles. A valid approach but not one that necessarily appeals to everyone.

yks 6nnetu hing
01-31-2012, 06:12 AM
so what would be a suitable substitute?

Way of Kings, Brandon Sanderson

There's more fantasy and more action, intrigue amount is similar but the focus is different: Sanderson's intrigue is very.... heist. Mistborn really was a Fantasy Ocean's 11 and while Way of Kings is markedly less focused on the heist element and more on political intrigue, the overall "feel" is definitely still more in favour of cloak-and-dagger than endless treaties (and weddings gone wrong)

Davian93
01-31-2012, 08:13 AM
Way of Kings, Brandon Sanderson

There's more fantasy and more action, intrigue amount is similar but the focus is different: Sanderson's intrigue is very.... heist. Mistborn really was a Fantasy Ocean's 11 and while Way of Kings is markedly less focused on the heist element and more on political intrigue, the overall "feel" is definitely still more in favour of cloak-and-dagger than endless treaties (and weddings gone wrong)

To be fair, the first 400-500 pages of Way of Kings was pretty boring as he was just giving backstory. The final third of the book was much faster paced IMHO.

yks 6nnetu hing
01-31-2012, 08:47 AM
To be fair, the first 400-500 pages of Way of Kings was pretty boring as he was just giving backstory. The final third of the book was much faster paced IMHO.

um... I thought it all went very pacy, particularly compared to GRRiM or Shithead Eriksson who just draaaaaag and plod around with their laden language.

Don't get me wrong, I actually very much like GRRM's writing style, it's just sometimes so heavy it's almost boring. and I do prefer a very well-written book (such as anything coming from GRRM, Jordan, Hobb or Tolkien) to one with serious language issues... But I also want to be able to get excited about a book and I never really did with aSoIaF as I get with Sanderson's books. Though, I suppose that's largely a question of individual taste.

I got an emotional response for the Chainmaster series of Horrible Plotholes but that's not a positive reaction at all. Mainly because I (as reader) hate being treated like I'm not good enough to even lay eyes on His Idiocy's Magnificent Piece of Writing and it's to be expected that the reader Doesn't Understand large chunks of the story.

Davian93
01-31-2012, 10:14 AM
I got an emotional response for the Chainmaster series of Horrible Plotholes but that's not a positive reaction at all. Mainly because I (as reader) hate being treated like I'm not good enough to even lay eyes on His Idiocy's Magnificent Piece of Writing and it's to be expected that the reader Doesn't Understand large chunks of the story.

??


As for the rest, I like it too but it was a lot of background information that doesnt really become clear to the final third of the book...particularly the back story for the armor/swords, etc. I still need to do a reread but that's what I recall of it. He's setting up a huge epic though so its to be expected.

yks 6nnetu hing
01-31-2012, 12:46 PM
??


Esiksson. House of chains and dogs in swords bs. I dunno, persaps i made a fatal mistake by reading his foreword full of egotistic and manic praise for himself that tainted my entire experience of the actual books. Of which, granted, i haven't read all but rather gave up when it became clear it's not my cup of tea.

Davian93
01-31-2012, 12:54 PM
Esiksson. House of chains and dogs in swords bs. I dunno, persaps i made a fatal mistake by reading his foreword full of egotistic and manic praise for himself that tainted my entire experience of the actual books. Of which, granted, i haven't read all but rather gave up when it became clear it's not my cup of tea.

Oh, okay. I tried to read the first book 2-3 times but could never get into it so its still sitting on the shelf collecting dust. I actually own books 2 & 3 of Malazan too but the motivation just isnt there to try reading them again.

Heinz
02-13-2012, 04:01 PM
I have to say, I'm pretty so-so on this series. People are going bonkers over it. Its worth a read, but I doubt I'll ever read them again (I re-read/watch things all the time, so to me its a big deal to not care to read a book again).

I've enjoyed the political intruege quite a bit. To me, its one of the saving graces.

I find I don't care for his style though. Its so broken up, so sporadic, that its really hard to keep an interest in the story. While I like political intruege, it does make for a slower pace, and the broken-ness of the storylines challenges that further.

I have other reasons, but they may hint at spoilers, so I won't give specifics. Short, non-spoiler summary, there are personal tastes that I like which JRRM (author) ignores or gets rid of. Its his story, I'm not trying to say 'Hey, he should conform to MY ideas!' Just saying, it's his choice to write the story that way, and its my choice to like it or not based on that, and I happen to not like it as much.

So yea, worth a read-through. And I am very curious to see the series. Haven't watched it yet.

suttree
02-13-2012, 04:36 PM
I highly recommend it. For me the quality of the writing and the number of mysteries that are central to the main story far overcome some of the complaints people have listed. Too much fantasy to my mind relies on plot gratification to carry the narrative at times. This is most certainly not an issue in aSoIaF.

Figbiscuit
02-14-2012, 02:49 PM
I don't have much to add (although I never let that stop me :D), other than to say that I personally love these books. I like em because they're long and hefty with tiny print, and therefore I know will take me a while to get through, I like the story and the characters, even the despicable ones, I like his style of writing and the world he has created, and the fact that whilst it's fantasy, it's not high fantasy, and to me always seemed a little more like it could be historical, although I realise that's in part due to the nature of the world in which the story is set, and their technological level.

I would prefer it if he would get on and finish writing the damn thing tho, partly due to my impatience, and partly to finally reassure me that he does actually know where he's taking the story. But that is just me, don't let these minor grips of mine put you off :)

Sgal83
03-06-2012, 06:53 AM
I don't quite like a song of ice and fire. It is much too 'dark' for me.

If you like political manipulation, then maybe this book is for you.

I prefer more 'innocent' kind of fantasy where the main characters don't always die.

Gilshalos Sedai
03-08-2012, 01:11 PM
I highly recommend it. For me the quality of the writing and the number of mysteries that are central to the main story far overcome some of the complaints people have listed. Too much fantasy to my mind relies on plot gratification to carry the narrative at times. This is most certainly not an issue in aSoIaF.


I'm sorry... I need a judge's ruling on this... huhn?

Mort
03-08-2012, 01:39 PM
I'm sorry... I need a judge's ruling on this... huhn?

I guess the meaning is that some fantasy series are too goal oriented? Not enough of, how would you say... journey? Like in the quote: "It's not the destination, it's the journey" ?

Or did I misinterpret your 'huhn'? :)

Gilshalos Sedai
03-08-2012, 01:41 PM
That's not "plot gratification" Mort.

Unless the poster doesn't know what "plot gratification" means from a technical standpoint?

Seeker
03-10-2012, 01:38 PM
That's not "plot gratification" Mort.

Unless the poster doesn't know what "plot gratification" means from a technical standpoint?

What does it mean? No, really, what does it mean? When I first read Suttree's post, I thought "So,he's saying that too many authors rely on telling a good story to keep people interested?" Isn't that a little like saying too many mechanics rely on automotive skills to retain their business?

All I can think of in response is "as opposed to?" What does an author do if not tell a story?

Nazbaque
03-10-2012, 05:38 PM
Well I did not like it. I read to about half of the third book and some characters I actually liked died and I thought "f**k it I liked those guys and now they are dead or this is another cheap death tease"

The main reason for my quiting was the lack of a destination. No ring to destroy, no Tarmon Gaidon. There was something the books were leading to, but about 70% of the plots didn't have any connection to it. In fact the different plot lines had very little to do with eachother.

TEOTW is a story in its own right. It is very clearly a first of a series but it works by itself. Likewise TGH and TDR work as independent sequals to a lesser degree. You could say that WOT is in four parts: TEOTW, TGH, TDR and TSR-AMOL. The first two books of ASOIF don't have that kind of independence.

The more adult tone was refreshing at first but after a while it was like the goody-goody effect to the opposite direction. Where some series alienate me because their characters are too good to be human this one's were too bad. By the time I gave up on it I was wishing that that world would be destroyed.

And finally there was my annoyance at the fact that there wasn't much ice, even less fire and no singing what so ever.

But in fairness I must underline the fact that I only read to about the middle of third book. It is possible that I quit just when it was about to fix at least some of these issues and introduce new twists to make up for the others.

I might give the series another chance at some point because the actual writing style was pretty good, but that won't be for years yet.

SauceyBlueConfetti
03-10-2012, 09:38 PM
Well, keep reading there is more ice. And more fire.

And in a VERY roundabout way there actually does appear to be a point. :rolleyes:

suttree
03-10-2012, 10:31 PM
What does it mean? No, really, what does it mean? When I first read Suttree's post, I thought "So,he's saying that too many authors rely on telling a good story to keep people interested?" Isn't that a little like saying too many mechanics rely on automotive skills to retain their business?

All I can think of in response is "as opposed to?" What does an author do if not tell a story?

First off to Gilshalos, I was a Lit major so I think we are squared away in that regards.

As to the topic too many fantasy authors in my opinion have prose that can be blunt and simplistic. This type of unpolished writing at times can lean on fan and plot gratification to pull the weight of the narrative. I will give an example. Take ToM for for instance. Let's consider the Cads v Tam showdown. That scene had so much promise but instead of the "remarkably adaptable" woman that RJ describes in the notes we have a deeply literal portrayal Cads acting the dumb bully and then called a dumb bully by Tam. Instead of being a well written scene he relies on fans having wanted to see Cads get her comeuppance.

Unfortunately portions of TGS and ToM fit that description. After the slow pace of CoT, WH etc many people just wanted the plot gratification and were content since things seemed to be happening. The issue is with how some of it is written, very blunt and heavy handed while being riddled with errors/typos. It is why I was so ecstatic to see Team Jordan admitting the issues and requesting more time to get aMoL right.

Terez
03-10-2012, 11:29 PM
Now you sound like Luckers. ;) Not that I haven't always agreed with Luckers on Cadsuane, but you're using his words and everything.

suttree
03-10-2012, 11:40 PM
Now you sound like Luckers. ;) Not that I haven't always agreed with Luckers on Cadsuane, but you're using his words and everything.

Yeah we have been discussing the whole BS critique thing a fair amount lately. Think you have seen that he and I have been somewhat outspoken when it comes to parts of TGS and ToM. This was the first thing that popped to mind as an example. I was pretty disappointed with how that scene played out, guess some of those old threads have rubbed off.

Seeker
03-11-2012, 11:16 AM
First off to Gilshalos, I was a Lit major so I think we are squared away in that regards.

As to the topic too many fantasy authors in my opinion have prose that can be blunt and simplistic. This type of unpolished writing at times can lean on fan and plot gratification to pull the weight of the narrative. I will give an example. Take ToM for for instance. Let's consider the Cads v Tam showdown. That scene had so much promise but instead of the "remarkably adaptable" woman that RJ describes in the notes we have a deeply literal portrayal Cads acting the dumb bully and then called a dumb bully by Tam. Instead of being a well written scene he relies on fans having wanted to see Cads get her comeuppance.

Unfortunately portions of TGS and ToM fit that description. After the slow pace of CoT, WH etc many people just wanted the plot gratification and were content since things seemed to be happening. The issue is with how some of it is written, very blunt and heavy handed while being riddled with errors/typos. It is why I was so ecstatic to see Team Jordan admitting the issues and requesting more time to get aMoL right.

All right, supposing I agree with you - I've always seen Cadsuane as a bit of a bully myself and everyone's claims to her being a remarkable character merely the result of intimidation - but supposing I agree, that has nothing to do with the prose. You're saying that too many authors rely on plot gratification to keep people interested and for an example, you offer a case where the plot didn't gratify you. You didn't like how Cads was portrayed. That's a plot issue not a prose issue.

suttree
03-11-2012, 11:49 AM
All right, supposing I agree with you - I've always seen Cadsuane as a bit of a bully myself and everyone's claims to her being a remarkable character merely the result of intimidation - but supposing I agree, that has nothing to do with the prose. You're saying that too many authors rely on plot gratification to keep people interested and for an example, you offer a case where the plot didn't gratify you. You didn't like how Cads was portrayed. That's a plot issue not a prose issue.

Of course it is. In that scene we have poor characterization, an overly literal portrayal and lowest common denominator plotwork. There either was not time or space for Brandon to fully flesh it out so we rush from A to B with base motivations. The prose was fairly poor but the thrill of seeing Cads get hers is allowed to carry the narrative.

Seeker
03-11-2012, 10:00 PM
Of course it is. In that scene we have poor characterization, an overly literal portrayal and lowest common denominator plotwork. There either was not time or space for Brandon to fully flesh it out so we rush from A to B with base motivations. The prose was fairly poor but the thrill of seeing Cads get hers is allowed to carry the narrative.

Okay, I've been trying to formulate a response to you all afternoon and I'm having a hard time with it because I really can't understand what you're trying to say here.

A literal portrayal of a lowest common denominator plotwork.

Well, let's start with the beginning of the sentence, I guess. A literal portrayal... As opposed to? Now, please don't try to explain to me the difference between a literal and figurative interpretation of a piece of literature because what I'm trying to comprehend here is why "literal" means "bad." As a Lit major, I'm sure you know that every book has passages that are meant to be taken literally and passages that are meant to be taken contextually.

So, if the books says something like (and I'm making these up)

“But to accept a Warder Bond... Everyone knew that he would die one day, his blood staining the rocks of Shayol Ghul and supposedly delivering his people from certain doom at the hands of the Dark One. It was treated as insurmountable fact that Rand al'Thor would die before his time. So, did he dare accept a Warder Bond with all the consequences that it would entail? Could he force Min to endure the pain of his inevitable death?”

So, if the book says that, we know that Rand is not saying that he would literally force Min to endure pain but rather that she would endure it as a consequence of being bonded to him at the moment of his death. However, if the book says this:

“Rand swung his sword through the trolloc's neck, severing its head from its body.”

We ought to take that line literally because, honestly, what other interpretation is there?

Literal is not bad...

Now, on to the next part of your critique. “A lowest common denominator plot.” The interesting point is that Tam dressing down Cadsuane was not the focal point of this scene. For the most part, the scene focuses on Min's attempts to interpret the Karaethreon Cycle and on the validation of her ideas. Which comes from Cadsuane, by the way.

Toward the end of the scene, Tam steps in and announces that Rand nearly killed him with the One Power. His stand-off with Cadsuane lasts a mere three paragraphs and is treated mostly as an aside. If that feels rushed to you, it's because the point of that scene was not to give Cadsuane her comeuppance. In fact, you can hardly call it a comeuppance.

It's really just a case of both characters acting in accordance with their natural character traits. We've seen on numerous occasions that Cadsuane will be pushy, passive aggressive and insulting to anyone who fails to acknowledge her authority and that she's not above using the One Power to coerce a man into compliance.

“Three,” Cadsuane said and Rand's skin popped out in goose bumps an instant before something struck him hard across the bottom like a hard-swung switch.

As for Tam al'Thor. Let's not forget that during the months where Mat was on his way from Falme to Tar Valon, this man went to White Tower and demanded to speak to the Amyrlin herself and learn the whereabouts of his son. Tam is not afraid to challenge Aes Sedai.

So, the scene in question is nothing more than each character acting in accordance with their established traits. The events in that scene happened as they did simply because that's what would inevitably happen if you put those two in a room together. If you think this scene was meant to be a kind of... humiliation for Cadsuane, then, in my opinion, you're reading an intent on the part of the author that was simply not there in reality.

And finally.. I hope that you will let the amount of analysis that I have put into just one sentence from you stand as evidence of what I am about to say.

Good prose is important to telling a story but, all things considered, prose is merely tool, a means for describing the actions and events that make the story enjoyable. People have a tendency to mistake it for an end onto itself. You can say nothing in the most eloquent way possible and the fact remains that, in the end, you've said nothing.

“A literal portrayal of a lowest common denominator plotwork.”

This is a fancy way of saying not very much of anything. It makes you sound eloquent; it makes you sound like your appealing to some higher ideal of artistic merit but when you analyze the actual words, the only possible response is.. “Huh?”

suttree
03-11-2012, 11:19 PM
Except for the fact that you read the sentence wrong. I said a overly literal portrayal(of Cads) and lowest common denominator plot work. Cads was not the "remarkably adaptable" person RJ described in the notes. She was a dumb bully(bs bias shining through) and was then called such. It's like he knew he needed to touch on that scene and raced through just to check a list. Your comment on how fast it was only serves to back up my point. Before this Cads just about alway treated people based on their actions and had a very clear goal in mind. She would never, ever result to threats with the OP when facing someone like Tam. In fact she would look on any AS that needed to with disdain. Again this could have been a fantastic scene if handled right and it's my opinion that RJ's version would have been very different.

Look I really don't want to get stuck on this example but I do hope that my initial post is now a bit more clear. I appreciate the time spent on the response and get your point about prose. Two of my favorite authors are DeLillo and Pynchon however so that should tell you the order of my priorities when judging literature.

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 10:53 AM
Gee, thanks. As a lit major then, you can understand my objection to your phrasing was based upon the dismissal of plot gratification being BAD. You know.. advancing the story and all as it does. Otherwise, all you have is navel gazing. While appropriate in modern lit, it really has no place in this genre.

And, FYI, while we're throwing credentials around: I have a degree in English with a concentration in Creative Writing.

/Not going to touch yours and Seeker's debate.

Davian93
03-12-2012, 11:04 AM
Well, I graduated from Yardale with a 4.0 grade point average....


~rep to whoever gets the reference first~

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 11:08 AM
Well, I graduated from Yardale with a 4.0 grade point average....


~rep to whoever gets the reference first~

:p

suttree
03-12-2012, 11:29 AM
Gee, thanks. As a lit major then, you can understand my objection to your phrasing was based upon the dismissal of plot gratification being BAD. You know.. advancing the story and all as it does. Otherwise, all you have is navel gazing. While appropriate in modern lit, it really has no place in this genre.

And, FYI, while we're throwing credentials around: I have a degree in English with a concentration in Creative Writing.

/Not going to touch yours and Seeker's debate.

It was my fault for not being more clear in the first post. Plot gratification in of itself is quite obviously not a bad thing. When the quality of the writing is poor and it is used to carry the narrative it most definitely can be. So if you think navel gazing has no place in this genre I'm assuming you don't like Peake or Crowley?

Also the tone of my second post wasn't trying to be dismissive. You questioned my knowledge on the topic, I answered and moved on or just throw credentials around. Where did you go to school by the way? How did you like the Creative Writing program? Cheers.

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 11:32 AM
It was my fault for not being more clear in the first post. Plot gratification in of itself is quite obviously not a bad thing. When the quality of the writing is poor and it is used to carry the narrative it most definitely can be.

Also the tone of my second post wasn't trying to be dismissive. You questioned my knowledge on the topic, I answered and moved on. Where did you go to school by te way? How did you like the Creative Writing program? Cheers.


I went to the University of Houston. At the time, for Creative Writing programs it was #2 in the country. Since #1 was Iowa (and still is, IIRC), I uh... opted for #2. I hate Iowa.

The Unreasoner
03-12-2012, 11:37 AM
Well, I graduated from Yardale with a 4.0 grade point average....


~rep to whoever gets the reference first~
french piece of crap.

suttree
03-12-2012, 01:59 PM
I went to the University of Houston. At the time, for Creative Writing programs it was #2 in the country. Since #1 was Iowa (and still is, IIRC), I uh... opted for #2. I hate Iowa.

Very cool, I have heard great things about both schools. I went to UC Santa Barbara. We had a good department although to be honest my decision at the time was based more on the quality of the surf. :) Anyway not sure if you saw it since I edited after you posted but what do you think of Crowley and Peake. They would seem to fit squarely in that category which you said doesn't belong in this genre.

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 02:26 PM
Very cool, I have heard great things about both schools. I went to UC Santa Barbara. We had a good department although to be honest my decision at the time was based more on the quality of the surf. :) Anyway not sure if you saw it since I edited after you posted but what do you think of Crowley and Peake. They would seem to fit squarely in that category which you said doesn't belong in this genre.

They're not ringing a bell at the moment. Full names?

Tomp
03-12-2012, 03:14 PM
I went to the University of Houston. At the time, for Creative Writing programs it was #2 in the country. Since #1 was Iowa (and still is, IIRC), I uh... opted for #2. I hate Iowa.

I have absolutely no degree in writing.

I just dabble on my spare time.

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 03:34 PM
I have absolutely no degree in writing.

I just dabble on my spare time.

I probably shouldn't have bothered. Though... I learned to have a thick skin. Nothing like having your crap be torn up to your face and to be told you can't write to muster up a sense of bloody-mindedness.

Tomp
03-12-2012, 03:37 PM
Nothing like having your crap be torn up to your face

Nope that never happened to me.

Was it smelly?

Gilshalos Sedai
03-12-2012, 03:49 PM
Nope that never happened to me.

Was it smelly?

Cute.

It was actually quite painful. But then I sold my first short story after that. Made it better.

Anyway... we derailed!

suttree
03-12-2012, 07:42 PM
They're not ringing a bell at the moment. Full names?

Mervyn Peak "The Gormenghast Novels"

John Crowley "Little Big"

They are two of the more critically acclaimed fantasy works. "Little Big" has been praised by mainstream critics such as Harold Bloom and Crowley has won numerous World Fantasy Awards. In regards to Peake C.S Lewis said of his work "[Peake's books] are actual additions to life; they give, like certain rare dreams, sensations we never had before, and enlarge our conception of the range of possible experience."

Nazbaque
03-13-2012, 04:04 PM
Well, keep reading there is more ice. And more fire.

And in a VERY roundabout way there actually does appear to be a point. :rolleyes:
What about the singing?

SauceyBlueConfetti
03-14-2012, 09:51 AM
Mervyn Peak "The Gormenghast Novels"

Tortuous. I absolutely abhorred Gormenghast. I tried 3 times and could never make it past the first 150 pages.

suttree
03-14-2012, 01:20 PM
Tortuous. I absolutely abhorred Gormenghast. I tried 3 times and could never make it past the first 150 pages.

Yeah, people tend to have pretty strong feelings either way with Gormenghast. Not much middle ground. I thought the prose was brilliant and it is one of those series that really allows you to be fully immersed in the world. Thought it also does a wonderful job of exploring personnel freedom verse social duty as the main theme in the novels.

Figbiscuit
03-14-2012, 05:03 PM
Gormenghast is another book I read years and years ago, and one I was debating getting for my Kindle. Gonna have to put that thing to use at some point :rolleyes:

I remember I struggled with it at first, but once I'd got into it I really got into it. If you see what I mean. At least, that's what I remember. A lot of wine has flowed since then...

Am I right in thinking there are sequels?