Kevin's Watch

I miss a couple days, and people go crazy! FWIW, I don't think I condescended to anyone. I think I tried to explain why/how I liked it.
If I was condescending...well...tough. [heh...now that IS condescending ].
Seriously, though, it's difficult. A majority of things people don't like are just the things a did. A few I agree with...didn't work so well. A few things:
I think the Masters are marvelous and well-done, and all because Stave's character shows exactly what they are by becoming what they are not.
I don't think the themes/concepts are sent crashing down on the characters heads, I think they act as people act in extremis [however that's spelled].
For me, this book works in its place just like a painting I saw once: It shows a town from above, with a beautiful orange--y red sunset coloring roofs and environment, just gorgeous...but, in fact there is no orange or red anywhere in the painting except the small sun itself. If you cover up the sun with your thumb, the whole scene becomes a dull, flat, boring, mud-puddle place.
I thought letting the Ranhyn decide was great, and unexpected.
In fact, I liked the whole situation...Imagine it: we have to save the freaking world, and we have NO IDEA what's best to do next!
I thought the building of the cairn was the Giants to perfection.
I thought the assorted deaths were earned, well done, and surprising in the moment, but foreshadowed in hindsight...and a couple give rise [depending on which talking about] both to an immediate "everything's lost, nothing makes sense" as well as of justice/completion/severing right now, and hope/terror/confusion for the future.
It thought the "SHE" chase a little longer than necessary...yet the mood of it nicely done. Has "SHE" EVER hurried? Has "SHE" ever NEEDED too? Who the hell would she expect to be able to get away?

And for Atrium? I think it was?...I did roughly [heh..conceptually? ] point at what I think about how Linden/World are suffering the same tortures/events. If there is ever [I'm sure there will be] a chapter by chapter dissection in the grand tradition of the Watch, you'll probably see my examination of that ad nauseum.

hue of bone wrote:

But the main issue is entirely not with the characters, it is the lack of pay-off. The four books are intended to be four volumes of a single story. In three years we will be able to see these volumes in the context of the whole.

I have to agree with the sentiments expressed in the above. From my own point of view, I would not dream of doing any Last Chronicles art until the last book comes out.

I still have some hope that's going to happen, and you have a point about the need for context. But I gave up on the Gap books after the third because it was just too bleak and annoying to bear. Maybe the fourth and fifth made up for it, but by that point I didn't care about those people anymore. It's really getting like that here; I almost don't care what happens to Linden and Covenant or anyone else in the story any longer.

The degree of destruction the Land suffered from by the end of that book was simply too great to feel any sense of victory.

WGW started off a bit weak in my opinion, but got better and better. I never stopped feeling the presence of the Land in the story, however badly Donaldson beat it up. And it made Lindens victory in the end so much more ecstatic. Still one of my favourite all time reads! This is very relevant to my criticism: The Land, Donaldsons fantasy setting, was what made his story work. That backdrop and the protagonists mental struggles made for a kind of perfect symbiotism. Back then i could see and feel how the Land actually reflected their inner struggles. But in the last chrons, the Land isnt reflecting anything anymore. Its gone blank. And so we are left with just the internal anguish. And im not saying that that the introspective approach could not have worked under any circumstances. Just that its mostly not working for me as it is written now.

shadowbinding shoe wrote:

Hiro wrote:

peter wrote:
(Just one point; I am suprised in this thread how many people seem to accept it as read that we have all struggled to get into other TC books, that TOT had a terrible ending and that we all know that Donaldson externalises his protagonists inner problems in a reflected situation in the Land in which they are marooned. I didn't, it didn't and I don't.)

Same here on all accounts. TOT has always been one of my favorites of the Chron's.

Yes, me three. If anything, it was WGW I had problems with. The degree of destruction the Land suffered from by the end of that book was simply too great to feel any sense of victory.

Dittoes for the ending of The One Tree, when the questors slinked away in defeat. But it paid off in the long run.

Guess my review was one you saw on Amazon. I got halfway through it, with much determination to do so, and now it's gathering dust. I will finish it someday I guess, but it's not holding me captive like the first six books did. Incredibly disappointed. Different strokes, so don't get call out the posse, folks. Everyone has an opinion, I'm entitled to mine.

NO SPOILERS

Rocksister wrote:Guess my review was one you saw on Amazon. I got halfway through it, with much determination to do so, and now it's gathering dust. I will finish it someday I guess, but it's not holding me captive like the first six books did. Incredibly disappointed. Different strokes, so don't get call out the posse, folks. Everyone has an opinion, I'm entitled to mine.

Which review is yours? I read all of them up to a certain date.

I'm not a huge AATE fan either, I personally gave it 3 1/2 Amazon stars. (I did not post a review.) Then I looked at the number of star ratings at Amazon and it is around 3 1/2 on average. So I am just an average reader. I liked some parts, didn't like others, sometimes I had to find reasons to continue reading on through the slow parts. I look forward to the fact that the ending is going to contain, as always, some action sequences, and I had to resist the urge to skip forward to those. Which Covenant books did NOT contain action sequences at the end? They all did.

The ending reminded me of the end of TOT. It's not the same, but it leaves you hanging - for three years. At least the publication dates between TOT and WGW were only about 1 year, although to me it seemed like years.

Here's a funny rumor from back then. During the long wait after TOT a friend of mine told me that the manuscript for WGW was on its way to the publisher but was stolen by an avid fan who couldn't wait any longer to read WGW. Thus it was an even longer wait as Donaldson was (allegedly) forced to re-write the entire thing.

But really, it only seemed like a long wait because I was used to picking up a new Xanth book every couple months or less as Anthony pounded them out at a rapid, money-making pace using his non-qwerty Dvorak typewriter. (Volume, volume, volume!)

Edit - a kind of correction, I realize Anthony did not just do Xanth, he had a few series going, some of which contained some quite interesting stuff to me at the time.

I found the Amazon review by Rocksister "tee."

One of the commonest complaints concerns Donaldson's wordiness or choice of words. So I thought you would like to know that while Donaldson was going over the manuscript with his editor she would, now and then, tap the page with her pencil and chide him over this very thing.

Now, doesn't that just make you die to see the unexpurgated version of AATE?

Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

It is art. It has nothing to do with YOU. I know that is difficult to understand in the narcissistic playground that is contemporary American culture, but...sometimes literature doesn't give a shit about your opinion. In fact, most GOOD art doesn't give a shit about other people's opinions. And the frequent misconception that artists have some sort of obligation to the public is amusing as well as pathetic. Donaldson's wordiness is a vector of his art, and that is enough. Buy a dictionary, learn some new words (ooohhh...so hard!!! I'm too busy!!!) Or don't read it. And stop complaining.

johnsomc wrote:Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

It is art. It has nothing to do with YOU. I know that is difficult to understand in the narcissistic playground that is contemporary American culture, but...sometimes literature doesn't give a shit about your opinion. In fact, most GOOD art doesn't give a shit about other people's opinions. And the frequent misconception that artists have some sort of obligation to the public is amusing as well as pathetic. Donaldson's wordiness is a vector of his art, and that is enough. Buy a dictionary, learn some new words (ooohhh...so hard!!! I'm too busy!!!) Or don't read it. And stop complaining.

Welllll, I think Ayn Rand would buy into that idea of art. I have read The Fountainhead, you know? And I recall a certain fictional architect in that book who didn't give a shit if the fictional home owner's grandma couldn't negotiate the spiral stairs he designed for the work-of-art house.

On the other hand, there is a fine line between producing fine art that nobody buys, and on the other hand being able to afford to eat and even live well off of it. Roark (our fictional architect in the last paragraph) managed the latter, but then he was a fictional character after all.

johnsomc wrote:Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

Which people are you talking about? How do you know their experience or professional acumen?

johnsomc wrote:...sometimes literature doesn't give a shit about your opinion.

I was giving my opinion to other humans here, not to "literature." Some of them do seem to give a shit. At least they're reading.

johnsomc wrote:And the frequent misconception that artists have some sort of obligation to the public is amusing as well as pathetic.

I think they at least have an obligation to give me my $25 worth in quality "art." If they give me a 100% money back guarantee, then you're right, they have no obligation whatsoever. But when they ask me for my money, at the very least they should accept that people will have the audacity to voice their opinions, and inform other purchasers of whether or not the book is worth the price. While "literature" may not give a shit, my wallet most certainly does.

With that said, I'll keep buying Donaldson in hardback no matter how bad his books get (and really, AATE is absolutely the worst book he has written). He has earned my support.

Zarathustra wrote: With that said, I'll keep buying Donaldson in hardback no matter how bad his books get (and really, AATE is absolutely the worst book he has written). He has earned my support.

Do you really consider AATE worse than RotE? AATE may have been been less focused but beside the initial part (before the translation into the Land) RotE had very little of value. Banal characters and worldbuilding, little and uninteresting plot. What was there to prefer it over AATE?

shadowbinding shoe wrote:

Zarathustra wrote: With that said, I'll keep buying Donaldson in hardback no matter how bad his books get (and really, AATE is absolutely the worst book he has written). He has earned my support.

Do you really consider AATE worse than RotE? AATE may have been been less focused but beside the initial part (before the translation into the Land) RotE had very little of value. Banal characters and worldbuilding, little and uninteresting plot. What was there to prefer it over AATE?

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:

johnsomc wrote:Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

It is art. It has nothing to do with YOU. I know that is difficult to understand in the narcissistic playground that is contemporary American culture, but...sometimes literature doesn't give a shit about your opinion. In fact, most GOOD art doesn't give a shit about other people's opinions. And the frequent misconception that artists have some sort of obligation to the public is amusing as well as pathetic. Donaldson's wordiness is a vector of his art, and that is enough. Buy a dictionary, learn some new words (ooohhh...so hard!!! I'm too busy!!!) Or don't read it. And stop complaining.

Welllll, I think Ayn Rand would buy into that idea of art. I have read The Fountainhead, you know? And I recall a certain fictional architect in that book who didn't give a shit if the fictional home owner's grandma couldn't negotiate the spiral stairs he designed for the work-of-art house.

On the other hand, there is a fine line between producing fine art that nobody buys, and on the other hand being able to afford to eat and even live well off of it. Roark (our fictional architect in the last paragraph) managed the latter, but then he was a fictional character after all.

Wellll, Worm, to enjoy my role as narcissistic player, Roark DID care that the building functioned. He just didn't believe in the fashionable, unnecessary, traditional, arbitrary, merely decorative.

But Johnsomc: the MAKING of art is, of course, only a matter of the vision of the artist, and the integrity/necessities of the work. But [once it is made] it is absurd to claim it is anything at all, let alone an artwork, if it has NO relationship to me/people.
And I say that as one of those who likes the book, and while not THE best, contains portions that are among the absolute best.

shadowbinding shoe wrote:

Zarathustra wrote: With that said, I'll keep buying Donaldson in hardback no matter how bad his books get (and really, AATE is absolutely the worst book he has written). He has earned my support.

Do you really consider AATE worse than RotE? AATE may have been been less focused but beside the initial part (before the translation into the Land) RotE had very little of value. Banal characters and worldbuilding, little and uninteresting plot. What was there to prefer it over AATE?

I should emphasize that I'm not quite done with AATE, so my judgment is admittedly premature. Perhaps my statement above was too harsh, in light of the possibility for the end to redeem it all in my eyes.

However, I doubt that any ending can change my opinion of what has gone before. My problems with the book are more on the execution of what was attempted by SRD, rather than the scale of what he attempted. Sure, if we did a side-by-side comparison of individual features in Runes vs AATE, AATE definitely has advantages. The places they go are more epic. The scope is larger, the danger is more explicit. AATE wins out in that regard. But in between those individual features, the narrative was bloated with opportunities for wise revisions, in my opinion. What was there could have been a lot more powerful if it had been said with fewer words. Maybe three years isn't enough time to make a manuscript that large sing. Or, maybe it's exactly what SRD intended, and I just personally didn't like it as much.

Anyway, for me Runes was more successful in execution of what it was supposed to be--the introduction of a new (and last) Chronicles--rather than what was attempted in that particular book.

Vraith wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:

johnsomc wrote:Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

It is art. It has nothing to do with YOU. I know that is difficult to understand in the narcissistic playground that is contemporary American culture, but...sometimes literature doesn't give a shit about your opinion. In fact, most GOOD art doesn't give a shit about other people's opinions. And the frequent misconception that artists have some sort of obligation to the public is amusing as well as pathetic. Donaldson's wordiness is a vector of his art, and that is enough. Buy a dictionary, learn some new words (ooohhh...so hard!!! I'm too busy!!!) Or don't read it. And stop complaining.

Welllll, I think Ayn Rand would buy into that idea of art. I have read The Fountainhead, you know? And I recall a certain fictional architect in that book who didn't give a shit if the fictional home owner's grandma couldn't negotiate the spiral stairs he designed for the work-of-art house.

On the other hand, there is a fine line between producing fine art that nobody buys, and on the other hand being able to afford to eat and even live well off of it. Roark (our fictional architect in the last paragraph) managed the latter, but then he was a fictional character after all.

Wellll, Worm, to enjoy my role as narcissistic player, Roark DID care that the building functioned. He just didn't believe in the fashionable, unnecessary, traditional, arbitrary, merely decorative.

Narcissistic player? Why is that your role? I don't know what he means by "narcissistic playground."

Of course, form follows function. But when the owner of the new home complains that grandma can't negotiate the fancy staircase, that tells you something more than "form follows function." That tells you Roark just didn't - objectively - care how anybody felt about his buildings. That makes him seem narcissistic to me. Also, narcissism is a widespread phenomena that doesn't respect who you are in a society, but I often see it among professionals.

I don't know what this has to do with the topic anymore.

Edit - I'm not a Rand fan, but I've read her works and find much to disagree with. An example of form not following function she gave was the coach of some English or French queen that was ornately decked out in golden angels and the like. And yet I say that those decorations did serve a purpose, their function was purely social, but it is a function (narcissistic).

Enough of that, I don't know where this is even going.

Zarathustra wrote:
However, I doubt that any ending can change my opinion of what has gone before. My problems with the book are more on the execution of what was attempted by SRD, rather than the scale of what he attempted. Sure, if we did a side-by-side comparison of individual features in Runes vs AATE, AATE definitely has advantages. The places they go are more epic. The scope is larger, the danger is more explicit. AATE wins out in that regard. But in between those individual features, the narrative was bloated with opportunities for wise revisions, in my opinion. What was there could have been a lot more powerful if it had been said with fewer words. Maybe three years isn't enough time to make a manuscript that large sing. Or, maybe it's exactly what SRD intended, and I just personally didn't like it as much.

Agreed. However, I often wonder how I personally would write the story while keeping to the same story. I believe this is all heading toward some definite end for which there is only one way to tell the story. If anything in it changed, the ending would change, and it wouldn't be the same story.

Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

As long as Donaldson writes books not only for college professors you will have to accept the fact that other people than just college professors will voice their opinions on said books.

What a glorius example of high debate standards you set there, BTW.

Zarathustra wrote:

johnsomc wrote:Except to say that...these forums pretty much confirm what I have always believed as a college-level rhetoric instructor: electronic communication legitimizes the opinions of people who have no experience or professional acumen to base their opinions on.

Which people are you talking about? How do you know their experience or professional acumen?

Johnsomc is losing out on an opportunity to instruct us. I do pay attention to his well-thought out posts.

I personally know a guy IRL who only visits an online forum where certain credentials are required. If you can't show someone there proof of the appropriate degree or professional license, you can't get in.

In my real life debates with this guy, he likes to utilize the argument from authority (i.e., he runs and hides behind his diploma) whenever he runs out of real ideas. So I told him he would be demolished on one of those intellectual boards, and his reply was to "bring it on." But it never happened. Some people don't like being knocked down out of their ivory tower through being shown the error of their ways by some online "nobody" who flunked out of high school.

This attitude is hardly unheard of, it's just not admitted very often. You just don't see it very often because they are keeping it discretely behind the walls of their private online forums.

Edit: The internet is the "great leveler," especially on most of these forums. It does not recognize social status.

If SRD wrote a book that could only be appreciated by people with full professional literary qualifications, he truly would have failed at his job.

johnsomc wrote:.. Buy a dictionary, learn some new words (ooohhh...so hard!!! I'm too busy!!!) Or don't read it. And stop complaining.

Not a bad suggestion, although I have two issues with it. Why spend money on a dictionary when all the difficult words can be Googled? Maybe some out there don't know how to "define:" words with it? Then there are the words Donaldson made up. Those can only be found online -
"unambergrised," [correction - Donaldson says he stole this neologism]
"analystic,"
"unhermeneuticable."