Leave a comment

Comments 15

dawtheminstrel September 6 2007, 19:35:56 UTC
I'm interested in your differenting conflict and tension. That's thought provoking because it underline how a writer or movie maker can provide all kinds of action without hooking the audience into looking toward the future and wondering how something important is going to turn out.

In general, I've been disappointed in books that bill themselves as part of a trilogy (though I adore GRRM's Song of Ice and Fire and Tolkien is my idol). I think it's for the reason you name, that too often the individual books aren't satisfying on their own. We get tons of setup or recap. Martin doesn't do that. Each book has a satisfying arc of its own, even though it also links to the other books. I like books that are a series (ie use the same characters and world) but I prefer it when each book can stand on its own ( ... )

Reply

calico_reaction September 7 2007, 01:43:02 UTC
Whew, you're making me think. I got the comment this afternoon, and I almost started rattling off a response, and then I froze. :) It's complex, and I'm not sure if I can explain it coherently, but let's try. :)

Conflict: in the book, there's lots of fight scenes, lots of people who don't like each other, plenty of action. There's plenty of internal conflict as well, at least with two of the main characters that I can think of.

But there never seemed to be any goals. No immediacy. Months would pass between chapters and I wouldn't even realize it. Action happened that felt arbitrary, not as something that truly posed a danger to the characters. And because I don't know what the main goal of the arc is, other than to save the world, I'm assuming, I can't feel any real tension.

I think that's the downfall, at least in this case, of the overarc that doesn't have a subplot, or at least an obvious goal. Sometimes, the latter doesn't bother me, but I have to be really taken in by the character/world/writing for that to happen.

You know ( ... )

Reply


juushika September 6 2007, 20:09:38 UTC
There are many reasons that I avoid series where the individual books don't stand alone—the sense of incomplete action is one of them. (The fact that the author is basically ordering me to spend $50 on the series is another.) I tend to let non-standalone series prove themselves, first, by receiving great reviews or becoming staples of the genre, i.e. (of course) Tolkien. Then at least I know it's worth risking the frustration and spending the money on, as necessary.

This review? Was a lot of fun to read.

I just wanted to comment to wave and let you know that I added you because your reviews are brilliantly written and very readable, and I'm always looking for a good discussion on books or, failing that, a few new titles to add to my to-read list. I look forward to keeping tabs on your reviews.

Reply

calico_reaction September 7 2007, 01:46:10 UTC
There are many reasons that I avoid series where the individual books don't stand alone-the sense of incomplete action is one of them. (The fact that the author is basically ordering me to spend $50 on the series is another.) I tend to let non-standalone series prove themselves, first, by receiving great reviews or becoming staples of the genre, i.e. (of course) Tolkien. Then at least I know it's worth risking the frustration and spending the money on, as necessary.

I know that there's some books I wouldn't mind checking out but not spend the money on, but my problem is that the local library is pure crap, and the best ones are nearly an hour away. I just can't justify the drive to satisfy my curiosity for one book, you know? Plus, I have a sickness...I MUST BUY BOOKS. :)

And thanks. I always worry when I get snarky with a review. :)

And thanks for your kind words on my reviews. Sometimes it's hard to know what people think, but hey, I'm all about pimping books! :)

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

calico_reaction September 7 2007, 01:46:59 UTC
Thanks for your comments! I'm glad to know I'm not alone in my nitpicks. :)

Reply


a_real_hermit September 7 2007, 01:24:30 UTC
What a nice review, thanks.

I won't be reading this one. I like a good series, but if a book can't stand up by itself, I'm not interested.

Reply

calico_reaction September 7 2007, 01:48:09 UTC
Thanks for your comments!

Yeah, it's hard to know if a serial book is worth reading. Some that don't stand alone can be gold if you can get into the world or the characters, but I really couldn't get into either. :-/

Reply


anatwork September 7 2007, 10:24:21 UTC
First off, I liked your review. The last few times I've been to the bookstore I've been tempted by the book (pretty cover, yanno), but then I actually picked it up and read the back blurb. Like you said, it didn't spark a lot of interest. In fact, I've been in a bit of an epic slump lately because of a lack of originality in the books I've picked up. I've heard a lot about all these great new books but I'm holding off on those for a bit ( ... )

Reply

calico_reaction September 7 2007, 11:33:34 UTC
Waiting to see how the trilogy pans out wouldn't be a bad idea, and I know there's some sites that've already reviewed the first and second books (which are available in the UK), so that may give you a better indication. I know Pat's Hot List is one of them: http://fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com/

And thanks! :)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up