Leave a comment

Comments 38

(The comment has been removed)

calico_reaction December 26 2012, 12:35:13 UTC
The Fairyland books (be sure to read in order!) are far more accessible, especially if you're looking for a slightly more traditional storytelling format. :) I'm glad you're hooked enough to keep trying!

Reply


Fun (or the absence thereof) ext_1566781 December 26 2012, 08:16:45 UTC
Interesting you should mention Gaiman, because he sprang to mind for me as well. Sorry to say Valente doesn't come out all that well from the comparison ( ... )

Reply

Re: Fun (or the absence thereof) nephtis5 December 26 2012, 17:41:04 UTC
Gotta disagree. There are a lot of jokes there, they just happen to be Russian jokes.

Reply


thebluerose December 26 2012, 09:37:23 UTC
I have had issues with Valente, I did actually enjoy Palimpsest but nothing else of hers was I able to get beyond a doz pages until you recommeded the Fairyland book.

So I havent tried with this because chances are I wouldnt like it. There is a thing some authors do, where you are left with the feeling that they know more about the story than you do, and are only telling you SOME of it and you have to figure the rest out for yourself. Elizabeth Bear does this a lot as well, her Prometheus series drove me nuts for it, and this is the issue I have with Valente.

Note I do not deny her talent, and her skill with prose is much to be admired. But when you can't find your way to the end of a paragraph and understand what happened in it, the story itself becomes more of a trial.

I met her at Worlcon a couple of years ago and she seems like a very groovy chick, Im sorry we are not on the same wavelengths when it comes to her writing

Reply

calico_reaction December 26 2012, 12:36:10 UTC
It happens. She's not for everyone, and for all my whining about her not getting a Hugo, I suspect this is exactly the issue. :)

Reply


ext_901144 December 26 2012, 14:01:03 UTC
I've got it from the library and will give it a go but it will probably be next week before I start.

Reply

calico_reaction December 26 2012, 17:34:36 UTC
Looking forward to your thoughts!

Reply


temporaryworlds December 26 2012, 14:37:30 UTC
"Obviously, I didn't read it until now, but I wasn't eligible to nominate for the Hugo last year. And what kills me is that while she was on the long list of nominees, she didn't have enough to beat out Miéville or Martin, two big name fan favorites who wrote books that, even according to some of their fans, weren't their best work."

I think that this is the bane of most award ceremonies, from the Golden Globes, to the Hugos. Once an artist or writer or actor has done enough to be considered award worthy, they'll often get nominated even if the quality of their work of the moment isn't at the highest caliber. It's frustrating, but kind of the nature of the beast. People prefer to stick with what they're comfortable with.

Personally I don't consider Deathless to be Valente's best work, but it's certainly worth reading. I found some of the latter scenes in the book to be absolutely heartbreaking for example.

Reply

calico_reaction December 26 2012, 17:37:15 UTC
My least favorite is probably her Prester John series, so this one didn't even register on the radar in terms of where it fit on the best to worst scale for the author. :) That being said, the plot itself is rather nebulous, and I can see some people taking issue with that.

But in terms of Hugos, it's still a matter that I think the writing is a lot better than about half of the ones who DID get nominated. :) But you're right about the nature of award shows....

Reply


Leave a comment

Up