Discussion:
(ToM) Please spoil Towers of Midnight for me
(too old to reply)
gollum
2010-11-02 16:10:53 UTC
Permalink
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
Galad Damodred
2010-11-02 20:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
I have not yet read TGS. Just finishing of KOD so next book is going
to be TGS.

I am so looking forward to reading it since I hear it upset many RJ
fans. If this is indeed the case then Sanderson is going to be awesome.
p***@aol.com
2010-11-19 05:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Galad Damodred
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
I have not yet read TGS. Just finishing of KOD so next book is going
to be TGS.
I am so looking forward to reading it since I hear it upset many RJ
fans. If this is indeed the case then Sanderson is going to be awesome.
I liked both of his WoT books. Towers of Midnight strikes me as
jarring a bit more with Jordan's tone than TGS, where Sanderson seemed
to be writing more directly from notes. It's a bit more evident in
many cases which bits he's filling in himself, a bit too many
significant events happen 'off-screen', and I doubt Jordan would have
handled some major plot points the way he does (the climax to Mat's
part of the book is handled with less subtlety and more swords-and-
sorcery cliche than I'd have expected from Jordan given the set-up,
for instance). Some of the characterisation is off as well, especially
in the dialogue; though fortunately he (mostly) does away with the
stereotype cockney prose he wrote for Mat in Gathering Storm, the
overuse of colloquialisms (everyone says "I figured..." a lot, even in
formal situations, and Perrin's dialogue loses some of its
characteristic formality at times) is sometimes jarring.

However, these are mostly minor lapses - the plot progresses well, his
choice of characters to focus on and their relative importance is
mostly good and plays to his (and the characters') strengths, although
he does make the odd decision of showing major events in primary
characters' storylines through secondary characters' eyes (a major
plot point for Elayne and Perrin, for instance, is viewed entirely
through Faile's eyes and barely mentioned in those characters' own PoV
scenes).

Others may disagree - for some reason, Mat seems to have quite a fan
club and people will probably moan again that both Sanderson books are
more Perrin-heavy, but Perrin is inherently a more interesting
character to both read and write. His character develops over the
course of the books, Mat's barely has. Perrin is interestingly
conflicted; Mat just complains a lot, mostly about the same things
that got old after the first five or six books. And when there aren't
any major battles in the offing, he just doesn't *do* anything
interesting (how many filler scenes do we need with bars and dice
games?), never mind that it's hard to get engaged with his troubles
when he can be written out of any scrapes, however dire, just by
invoking his luck (which is basically what happens to his storyline in
ToM).

This sounds like a lengthy list of complaints, but overall I think
Sanderson captures the spirit of the series well enough that it's not
always easy to see where Jordan left off and he began. He undoubtedly
benefits from picking up the story when he did; he doesn't appear to
have Jordan's eye for detail, his finesse with portraying different
cultures (the Seanchan scenes in particular read as though they've
been written by rote from what went before, rather than making any
effort to elaborate on their society) or his ability to portray a
world as compellingly, so it's probably just as well he's started from
a point where he can get away with repeatedly describing the scenery
as yellowing or covered in black spots of Blight without the need to
add more detail.

Phil
David DeLaney
2010-11-03 04:48:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
I'm about 80% of the way through. It has not yet been addressed. Still,
I think it's very good, plus Mat's authorial-voice is working correctly
again yay!

Dave "have just finished the part where Aviendha finds out what happens if you
walk the other way" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from ***@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
maj
2010-11-04 12:27:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by David DeLaney
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
I'm about 80% of the way through. It has not yet been addressed. Still,
I think it's very good, plus Mat's authorial-voice is working correctly
again yay!
Dave "have just finished the part where Aviendha finds out what happens if you
 walk the other way" DeLaney
--
It's not the clock that slows the hour  The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE        HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>http://www.vic.com/~dbd/- net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Try reading the glossary entry under G at the bookshop.
Don't complain if tou get more than you wished for.

maj
Rast
2010-11-07 23:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by maj
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
SPOILERS, obviously
Post by maj
Try reading the glossary entry under G at the bookshop.
"A ruthless killer, she was responsible for the deaths of Aran'gar and
Asmodean and for the destruction of Mesaana"

Well, there we go. After 17 years the answer finally shows up.. in the
glossary. Wasn't worth the wait IMO.
--
"It's only possible to betray where loyalty is due," said Sandy.
"Well, wasn't it due to Miss Brodie?"
"Only up to a point," said Sandy.
- Muriel Spark
p***@aol.com
2010-11-19 04:52:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again, but I would like to know who killed asmodean.
Just look in the Towers of Midnight glossary - it's mentioned there
without explanation, and only hinted at in the main text itself.

Phil
p***@aol.com
2010-11-20 01:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again,
You're obviously new at this. Anyone who makes a habit of reading
fantasy and/or sci-fi quickly gets inured to atrocious prose - I've
made it through Tolkien (though even I'm not masochistic enough to
read the poetry) and once even a book by Orson Scott Card (but no more
than one). Sanderson is entirely unobjectionable by comparison. If you
really want to steel yourself try Philip K Dick, but be warned - I've
never succeeded in struggling through more than a couple of chapters
of his appallingly overwritten prose (a shame, since by all accounts
the actual content of most of his stories is pretty good).

Phil
p***@aol.com
2010-11-20 18:23:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@aol.com
Post by gollum
After TGS I'm not stepping foot near Brandon Sanderson's atrocious prose
ever again,
You're obviously new at this. Anyone who makes a habit of reading
fantasy and/or sci-fi quickly gets inured to atrocious prose - I've
made it through Tolkien (though even I'm not masochistic enough to
read the poetry) and once even a book by Orson Scott Card (but no more
than one). Sanderson is entirely unobjectionable by comparison. If you
really want to steel yourself try Philip K Dick, but be warned - I've
never succeeded in struggling through more than a couple of chapters
of his appallingly overwritten prose (a shame, since by all accounts
the actual content of most of his stories is pretty good).
Phil
As an addendum, as cynical as the above may sound, I seem to have
written it with near-impeccable timing, as the latest book I've picked
up drives the point home (it's The Dreaming Void by Peter Hamilton -
suffice to say, unless the plot does a *lot* to compensate for the
atrocious writing and so-far shoddy world-constructon - of the sort
that's based around throwing silly invented jargon around to make the
world seem "sci-fi" in lieu of actually presenting and detailing a
believable setting - I won't be picking up the sequels). It's no
wonder I've never noticed anything to object to in Sanderson's writing
when the standards for good literature this genre sets are so low. And
we wonder why sci-fi and fantasy novels are almost never in the
running for literary prizes.

Phil
David DeLaney
2010-11-21 04:10:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@aol.com
As an addendum, as cynical as the above may sound, I seem to have
written it with near-impeccable timing, as the latest book I've picked
up drives the point home (it's The Dreaming Void by Peter Hamilton -
suffice to say, unless the plot does a *lot* to compensate for the
atrocious writing and so-far shoddy world-constructon - of the sort
that's based around throwing silly invented jargon around to make the
world seem "sci-fi" in lieu of actually presenting and detailing a
believable setting - I won't be picking up the sequels).
James Nicoll said after book 3 that he was still waiting for the plot to
arrive. So you may at best want to check whether your local library has a
copy to glance at...
Post by p***@aol.com
And we wonder why sci-fi and fantasy novels are almost never in the
running for literary prizes.
Oh, that one's EASY. Because "if it's good writing and seems to be hewing to
the standards of lit'r'chur, then it can't POSSIBLY be EITHER of SF _or_
Fantasy. We won't ALLOW it.", spoken while peering through pince-nez on
end of nose. It might be "magical realism", or 'thoughtful future-type
history', but nooooo, if it smells to Them like literature smells then they
won't admit it can be SF or fantasy.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from ***@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
p***@aol.com
2010-11-21 12:56:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by David DeLaney
Post by p***@aol.com
As an addendum, as cynical as the above may sound, I seem to have
written it with near-impeccable timing, as the latest book I've picked
up drives the point home (it's The Dreaming Void by Peter Hamilton -
suffice to say, unless the plot does a *lot* to compensate for the
atrocious writing and so-far shoddy world-constructon - of the sort
that's based around throwing silly invented jargon around to make the
world seem "sci-fi" in lieu of actually presenting and detailing a
believable setting - I won't be picking up the sequels).
James Nicoll said after book 3 that he was still waiting for the plot to
arrive. So you may at best want to check whether your local library has a
copy to glance at...
Post by p***@aol.com
And we wonder why sci-fi and fantasy novels are almost never in the
running for literary prizes.
Oh, that one's EASY. Because "if it's good writing and seems to be hewing to
the standards of lit'r'chur, then it can't POSSIBLY be EITHER of SF _or_
Fantasy. We won't ALLOW it.", spoken while peering through pince-nez on
end of nose. It might be "magical realism", or 'thoughtful future-type
history', but nooooo, if it smells to Them like literature smells then they
won't admit it can be SF or fantasy.
Well, that's the thing - it's easy enough to sneer and blame
pretentiousness, but when you actually read this stuff, most of it
*is* far too badly-written to be worth considering. This Hamilton book
seems to have received all sorts of accolades from critics, suggesting
that it's actually quite good by sci-fi standards, but not only is the
prose appalling, the dialogue's incredibly stilted, the characters so
far unengaging (at, admittedly, a very early point in the book) and
the description of the setting still poor and jargon-laden (when
you've previously established all your characters have cybernetic
enhancements and can scan one another's upgrades, you don't need
sentences like "Ethan was using his internal enrichments to run a
passive scan, and if any of the representative's field functions were
active...", and yet Hamilton crams this kind of "Hey look at me, I'm
being SCI-FI!" overexposition in at every conceivable opportunity). So
far the low quality of the writing is the only thing I notice in
common with Heinlein, with whom one of the reviewers compares
Hamilton.

And as I noted before, even the icons of the genre are very often
terrible writers - Tolkien's an easy target, but people like PKD,
Asimov and Heinlein are worse. Herbert may be better than I remember
since I haven't tried reading Dune since I was a kid (I don't think I
got through it then), but then I thought that about PKD and regretted
revisiting him...

Phil

Loading...