Kevin's Watch

hamako wrote:I don't think you can comment on a book til you've read the whole thing really.

In that case, I'd say give The Book of All Hours part 2 a chance. It's not a sequel, but the conclusion.

i just finished it and i liked ist most of all even TC is not playing the main part

i just hate waiting for the next book

Disappointed? No, surely not.
There were some really breathe-taking passages, but also slower (as was said before). More of an introduction of a lot of characters, upsetting a whole bunch of questions.
So, I`m eagerly awaiting the next october

Malik23 wrote:

hamako wrote: I don't think you can comment on a book til you've read the whole thing really.

Well, considering the fact that most novels get rejected merely on a query letter or synopsis, I see no problem judging a book on a small portion. From my research into the publishing business, I've learned that most agents or editors can tell within a few pages if a book will be worth reading. If you can't get it right in those most crucial few pages--your opening--then why should we trust you with 500 more?

Personally, the first two pages of my own novel has been the most revised of any I've written. I've probably redone it about 30 times.

I totally disagree. Didn't Lord Foul's Bane get rejected about 47 times? A book should be judged in it's entirety. Just because a publisher's system of accepting/rejecting books is flawed doesn't make it the right method to assess a book. I take your point though, in part.

hamako wrote:

Malik23 wrote:

hamako wrote: I don't think you can comment on a book til you've read the whole thing really.

Well, considering the fact that most novels get rejected merely on a query letter or synopsis, I see no problem judging a book on a small portion. From my research into the publishing business, I've learned that most agents or editors can tell within a few pages if a book will be worth reading. If you can't get it right in those most crucial few pages--your opening--then why should we trust you with 500 more?

Personally, the first two pages of my own novel has been the most revised of any I've written. I've probably redone it about 30 times.

I totally disagree. Didn't Lord Foul's Bane get rejected about 47 times? A book should be judged in it's entirety. Just because a publisher's system of accepting/rejecting books is flawed doesn't make it the right method to assess a book. I take your point though, in part.

We are all entitled to our own opinions. But I don't stand alone in my opinion that some books can be adequately assessed in a few pages. SRD himself wrote in the GI:

Time and again, I pick up books written by people who imagine they can attain a white heat on page one; and of course I always put those books down unread. They sound silly. And worse than that: they sound like the writer doesn’t trust his/her story. Learning to understand how and why narrative power accumulates is crucial to the “success” of paragraphs like yours.

(12/11/2006)

While I disagree with him about striving for a "white heat" by page one, I do agree that you can quickly tell--at the very least--that a book's tone and style don't suit your personal expectations and reasons for reading fiction.

I've several times had a boring book turn non-boring and even very good eventually. On the other hand, I think I have gathered enough experience to know that a book that's written as badly as The Hickory Staff cannot become good in its course. Seriously, we are talking about Terry Goodkind level badness here, very possibly worse. It's not that there's nothing happening, it's that there's a lot of things happening and they're all handled incompetently. In addition, it appears that the book attempts to get that white heat on page two - in any case it fails spectacularly, as we just don't care at that point.

I'm no snob. I've seen an excerpt of Vellum too, and I'm not touching that either. I hate that sort of stylistic look-at-me style-over-substance self-gratification, but unlike with Eldarn, you could at least say Vellum has some sort of literary value, even if it's the university literature department kind of literature value.

I read the book before almost anyone, and I've griped about it from day one before it was even purchased by a publisher. But I also have hope.

I love the first two Chronicles. They were amazing reads, in content as well as how it was delivered. Someone else earlier in this thread posted they didn't think there were any moving parts in Runes. I disagree. There were plenty of moments that should have been moving. In effect, they were handled wrong compared to what we have become used to from Donaldson.

Here is where the failing lies in my opinion. The prose - how those moments were delivered. Donaldson's prose, which was lively, beautiful, and colorful in the first two trilogies, completely changed for Runes. Personally, I attribute this to him writing first person narrative in his mystery series, but it could also just simply be a change in style as a writer ages - leave the fluff out and get right to the bones of the story.

But the Land, and all who inhabit it, is a character by itself and it requires that fluff. If you look at how Donaldson set up his prior paragraphs to those in Runes, there is an enormous difference. Read the first paragraph from WGW and I challenge anyone to find a paragraph in Runes that matches it. You simply can't find one.

In effect, the setting, the characters descriptions and appearances and mannerisms, have all vanished. What is left is the bare bones of the story. And to most fantasy readers -- particularly fans of the prior Chronicles -- they want that same writing style. They want the vivid story with all of its colors, smells, and rich, vibrant prose.

Saying this book is a Prologue of sorts is fine, but I don't think that matters as far as this being a good book or not. It could have been a very effective Prologue, but the writing killed it for me.

Now, my hope is this. After having written a third person story again, maybe the former Donaldson will appear in Fatal Revenant. Again, it is hope, but I doubt it will happen. Donaldson has said in his GI and in Locus Magazine that he is no longer the same writer he used to be and does not believe in that "fluff." He's the writer and he gets to decide that, but I sincerely wish these Chronicles were written in the same form as the prior ones. Perhaps he left writing the third Chronicles too late in his writing life.

Anyway, it still will not hinder me from reading the next book. I'll just keep my fingers crossed the next 10 months.

Ard Rhys wrote:Now, my hope is this. After having written a third person story again, maybe the former Donaldson will appear in Fatal Revenant. Again, it is hope, but I doubt it will happen. Donaldson has said in his GI and in Locus Magazine that he is no longer the same writer he used to be and does not believe in that "fluff." He's the writer and he gets to decide that, but I sincerely wish these Chronicles were written in the same form as the prior ones.

I understand the argument that time changes the writer, that SRD is "no longer the same writer he used to be". I see the transformation. Is it a good thing or a bad thing? I don't know ...but as for not believing in "fluff" or, as I call it, "opera". Well, I say "BAH!" Ok, so one can't unlearn new strengths nor relearn old ones...but who said anything about relearning? I'm quietly confident that that which he though forgotten was always there and is still there.

Ah, I'm glad that this topic has gone back to talking about how much Runes sucks. Heh.

But yeah, I agree with you, Ard. When I read Runes, the biggest thing for me is that there just seemed to be something missing. I couldn't put my finger on it, but it was the thing that made the first two Chronicles and the Gap series so engrossing.-jay

Exactly. Neither the story nor the writing engaged me at all.

In the GI, when confronted with a specific passage from the 2nd Chronicles which purportedly exhibited more emotion than anything from Runes, SRD said that this kind of writing was exactly what his editors complain about. Now I know that he claims that his editors don't dictate what he writes, but he has admitted to taking advice when he thought they were correct. Is it possible that declining sales has caused him to doubt himself? To listen too readily to the criticisms of his trusted inner circle?

I'm just trying to find a way to explain what you all are describing. Myself, I wasn't as disappointed in the emotional content of Runes as some of you. It's more of a slow burn, than a raging emotional conflagration. But I really felt I was in Linden's head, very close to her experience as she went about her quest. The writing was emotionally powerful . . . it's just that darn story (or lack thereof) which comes up a bit empty.

The story (plot point by plot point through to the end) was definitely lacking. But I expected that once I realized the book is a giant Prologue setting up events for the Last Chronicles. And I am fine with it being a Prologue. SRD is having to tie up a lot of stuff that came before and he needs room to do that.

I felt how ragged Linden and the rest of the characters were. I understood them because SRD did a great job of getting into their heads. But what I didn't like is the prose around those moments, which is about 95% of the book. His word usage, sentence structure, paragraph structure -- all of that was different than what came before.

Was it his editors? It wasn't. It couldn't have been. Because I read the book before it had found a home. No editor had touched it. Only his agent had. But what was lacking is what I stated up above - the beauty of language. It just wasn't present.

And, scary thought, maybe it was Lester del Rey who brought that to the series. SRD has always been hard on Lester, and I can definitely see his point of view. But Lester also made people be their best (just look at Terry Brooks's first three books compared to the rest), and perhaps that is what we have here. There have been so many years between when SRD wrote under Lester's direction that maybe this is the real SRD.

I don't know. At any rate, as I said, I will read the next three books. There is no doubt about that. I still trust SRD. I still like the man (I've met him a few times), and I still appreciate the literary merit he puts into each one of his books. He is very talented. Perhaps I yearn for his past talent even while appreciating his new story.

S.

I donno, was the Gap series edited by Del Rey? Because I felt that has been his strongest work to date, even better than the Chronicles.-jay

kevinswatch wrote:I donno, was the Gap series edited by Del Rey?

No, Jay. Only the first and second Chronicles (to the best of my knowledge). I actually think he had women editor(s) for the Gap?

I agree with AR, in that what is lacking (if you find it lacking) can be atttributed to the Final Chronicles being closer in style to the Gap series, and the Man Who series, than they are to the First and Second Chronicles, or even Mordant's need.

Not only does this explain why the climaxes in Runes are less poignant than in the earlier Chronicles. But it also explains such things as why the full scope of the story is not showing until very far into the series (like the Gap), and that there is this large number of unanswered questions that the characters keep fighting against (like Man Who).

I believe the Gap series was published by Bantam. And I think the last book Lester edited was probably The Wounded Land, but the residual effects of writing as Lester demanded was probably still in effect for the next two years for The One Tree and White Gold Wielder.

All of this, of course, is conjecture -- except for the comparisons between prose. I feel that is very obvious if one breaks down the nouns, verbs, commas, sentences, paragraphs of it all.

I have no doubt SRD's imagination is working overtime for this series. That is still very strong. Perhaps my problem with it all is SRD might be too focused on the story instead of letting it breathe. It's percolated too long in his mind. A part of me, after I had read Runes, thought, "Well, maybe SRD is making a literary statement about Kevin's Dirt. Maybe SRD wants the prose to match the dirty feel of the land." But I quickly decided that isn't the case because Linden rises above it for a brief moment and then travels backward where the prose should have colorful and beautiful and just like it had been in the other series.

Ahhh well. It matter not. There are some fantastic reads out there and we take them as they come. The day there isn't a fantastic read available will be the day I criticize those I feel should be writing closer to the top of their game (and that will never happen, I assure you).

very disappointed. I am guessing SRD was short of cash and has tried to create a ongoing story line when the p[revious one was finished. All 6 books of the original were a complete story. there was a seamless flow from the first chronicles to the second. From the evidence so far this 3rd series seems to be contrived.


ps happy new year .