Kevin's Watch

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:42 pm**

Damn it...

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:51 pm**

How about minor deity?

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:56 pm**

I'll take what I can get.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 6:47 pm**

Cail wrote:... It's obvious SRD doesn't give two craps about what his fans think of him (unless they're stroking him), but he lost a ton of my respect by posting that.

I disagree Cail - respectfully. I think the following posts (I've just read the MULTITUDE of pages on this) highlight at least my concern with Preston.

Seareach wrote:...
This is someone teaching SRD how to suck eggs!

Seareach wrote:...
Again, Preston does not say "I didn't find Runes as compelling as your other novels" or what ever. He tells SRD how to write. There's a big difference as far as I'm concerned!

Wayfriend wrote:... Preston ... used the GI to unload his "wisdom" on Donaldson. It is the wrong vehicle. The wrong target. And the wrong reason.

Lucimay wrote:...there's a lot of know-it-all's out there who'd just LOVE a chance to tell an actual published author how they screwed up.

i liked SRD's response. i thought he was right on.

Preston wasn't saying - "I didn't really like this... why did you use that approach?" He was instructing SRD on his craft. That does seem to me to be impolite at the very least.

I submitted a question on the "swears" in Runes and indicated that it appeared incondign to me. He responded about why he had introduced more realistic language. I DID NOT instruct him to avoid swears in the future because ....

IMO, this is the fundamental problem with Preston's GI question. And why I do not have a problem with SRD's response.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 6:52 pm**

Truly, SRD could have been a lot edgier!

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:43 pm**

Um...woah. I don't think I can (or want to) contribute to this discussion at all. Heh. I guess I will say that I see good points from everyone, but I agree with whoever said that this is making a bit too much deal over one post.

But I do agree with Cail and Malik, that it just seems a bit off to me. I mean, I have a lot of problems with Runes (besides Linden, heh). I was sort of thinking at one point to fire off what I thought of Runes to the GI, but now, I definitely wouldn't want to, if it meant getting yelled at by SRD. Heh.

I understand you all when you say that SRD was trying to make an example of him, but I just wonder, did he need to make an example of him? Couldn't he just ignore that post?

The only other thing that I felt was kinda off was that SRD took the opportunity to nail into the poster of the question, but the person will forever be unable to defend himself.

I mean, the original post just didn't seem that bad to me. Especially not to warrent the beat-down that SRD delivered. Sure, he offered criticism about Runes. Shouldn't SRD expect that these things are going to be sent to the GI? Did he need to respond the way he did? Did the reader need to be yelled at for simply offering his opinion? Couldn't SRD have simply deleted it?

Oh well. I don't think it's a big deal though.

(Crap, I guess I did just contribute to this discussion. Dammit!

)

Wait, hold on, I think I read something even more important than this GI stuff...

he has given it props at least three times during his readings at Bubonicon

Dude, SRD gave us props? Sweet...

Heh.-jay

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:07 pm**

At least someone read my post!

I still think it's a "Do not disturb sign.", and that's all it is **offers Cail a beer and a valium**. I still think you read Runes way too slowly and had too many other things (primarily your thesis...[and a preconceived, sexist, view of Linden

]) on your mind, Jay.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:16 pm**

I see what Jay says about Runes, but my policy is 'Wait and see how ther series ends' before judging Runes, because it's not a standalone book, it's part 1 of 4. And, Donaldson hasn't failed me yet. Hell, it's Donaldson's writing that got me here, not my feelings on how Donaldson should write.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:33 pm**

"Hell, it's Donaldson's writing that got me here, not my feelings on how Donaldson should write."
-that's a pretty puissantic passage pussycat!

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 10:31 pm**

I just think it's a shame that people may think that this all means that SRD doesn't appreciate "criticism" (or, as I like to call them, "constructive comments"). As Creator points out, he brought up the issue of swearing in a question he asked SRD in the GI (and that could be seen as "criticism") but the way Creator worded his question was (in my opinion) polite. As Danlo says, SRD sought him out after a reading at Bubonicon to ask what he thinks. I for one know with 100% certainty that SRD appreciates constructive comments about his work, but there is (in my opinion) a time, a place, and a way of doing it.

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 10:52 pm**

Hey...NEW Questions in the GI Now....let's let this one DROP!!!!!

Posted: **Wed Oct 11, 2006 10:54 pm**

drew wrote:Hey...NEW Questions in the GI Now....let's let this one DROP!!!!!

Hey, who made you the "thought police"!

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:56 am**

Before we give up on this topic let me say that I read the aforementioned "negative" post and I had no issue with how SRD handled it. He made a point to make a point that he clearly felt strongly enough to violate his own clearly stated purpose for the GI. Its perfectly clear to me that SRD is not above being criticized, quite the contrary. However I happen to agree with his view that the GI is and should continue to be a forum for a cordial interaction between author and fan. Further the GI is not only a means for fans to communicate with SRD but is also a valuable promotional tool, which SRD is well within his rights to regulate for that purpose. I believe SRD reads his negative criticism but is under no obligation to share it in the GI. If this sentiment has already been expressed in this way earlier in this thread I appologize. IMHO of course.

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:27 pm**

sorry Waddley, about not including you in my Hasselhoff/deity comment. If I knew you better, perhaps I could make you my personal guardian angel ...
(sorry, that's as close as I get to deifying anyone .... except David Suzuki ... oh, and perhaps David Bowie .... and maybe my dad's cat that coughs up furballs in the shape of saints ...)

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:17 pm**

Waddley Hasselhoff wrote:Damn it...

Aw, poor Waddley...

[shameless self-promotion]of course, there's always the Pantheon game in the Close! [/shameless self-promotion]

Posted: **Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:10 pm**

Ossie: You have said that you planned the Last Chronicles at the same time as the Second Chronicles, seeding the 2C with “all of the loose ends and back doors” you would need to create the LC. However, obviously no-one else knew this & it took you 20 years to finally get around to the LC, after the publication of the 2C. If your plan to live forever had failed & you had joined the Creator before anyone even knew you had always planned to make the LC, would you have been happy with people thinking that the 2C was the ending you always intended for the entire story? Do you feel that, if circumstances had prevented the LC from ever existing, the 2C is a satisfactory end to the series? Or would it be a case of “I’m horrified you all actually thought I meant to end it with *that*?”

Although I conceived "The Second" and "The Last Chronicles" at the same time, I was never absolutely sure that I would ever write the final story. As I've said before, "The Second Chronicles" convinced me that I wasn't a good enough writer to tackle "The Last". And of course I had no way of knowing what the "trajectory" of my writing life would be. So I was careful to leave the story in a place that satisfied me. If I had faced a premature death, say, ten years ago, I'm sure that I would have felt personally "incomplete"--because I hadn't finished what I started--but I doubt that I would have felt any aesthetic frustration.

(10/12/2006)

Posted: **Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:37 am**

Sorry DLB, but that post doesn't give me anything to bitch and complain about. What's your point?

I'd like to say for the record that I do love Runes. I'm having a blast rereading it for the dissection and I can't wait for the next installment.

Posted: **Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:55 am**

Malik23 wrote:Sorry DLB, but that post doesn't give me anything to bitch and complain about. What's your point?

Yeah Dlb, give us something to work with here!

Posted: **Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:59 am**

DAMMIT!!! THAT ANSWER SRD GAVE MAKES ME SOOOOOOO MAD!!!

Ok, I got nothing. Heh.-jay

Posted: **Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:36 pm**

LOL ....
Yah, that's a pretty thorough answer on SRD's part.

I'd like to say for the record that I do love Runes. I'm having a blast rereading it for the dissection and I can't wait for the next installment.

me too!!!!

Kevin's Watch

The Gradual Interview