Kevin's Watch

Just about to start NoK myself, dime-man. I'll let you know what I think.

Demondime-a-dozen-spawn wrote:Finished NoK recently and gotta say I thought it was pretty bad.

Esselmont obviously has a different take on the world than Erikson, and i didn't like his take.

Other than the ultraviolence, the book seemed like your garden variety teen fantasy novel.

There were some passages that were good, but it overall lacked the flair and passion I get from Erikson's writing.

It's nice to have some more background on a character or three, and learn a few more details of the overall story arc, but man, I couldn't wait to finish that book and start on Reaper's Gale.

I'm just so freakin' addicted to Malazan that I love anything about it! There are very odd things about it, to be sure. Some interesting things, too, though.

But all the Dassem stuff was awesome!

Demondime-a-dozen-spawn wrote:I do hope Return of the Crimson Guard is better than Night of Knives.

I may not be a reliable critic, because of that addiction thing I just mentioned. But yeah, I believe CG is a lot better than NoK.

i'm in total and complete disagreement with dime's assessment of esselmont's writing. in fact, i found it grittier than erikson's but, for the most part, VERY similar in style. for me there was no real transition between reading Reaper's Gale and Return of the Crimson Guard whatsoever. in other words, it felt very much like the same author.
thats just me tho.

night of knives did jar me a bit because i'd read all the way through
bonehunters before reading it so i was backtracking all the way back
to pre-GotM and thus, was a bit jarred at the grittier writing.
but see i love gritty.
(am a huge hard-boiled detective fan on the order of jim thompson and david goodis and, tho i love him, chandler's work tho classified as the same genre, is far more "painterly"- which, i think, is what can be said about the difference between erikson and esslemont)

but on the way back through the series, when i got to Return of the Crimson Guard, i was sort of prepared for a grittier style and was not
in the least put off by it.

i have to say that i do think that erikson is the better writer, however, RotCG is just as good a book as any of the others in the series.
ya know how everybody talks about GotM being not as good and somewhat more immature as the rest of the series? well same with NoK and RotCG. by the time esselmont writes RotCG he's a more mature and better writer than he was when he wrote NoK.

Yeah, I didn't have a problem with the writing style, either. My problem was that there are several things I didn't understand, even after finishing. Since I'd read thousands of pages of other stuff, I expected to be less confused. Who was this character? What happened here? But really no complaints. heh

Night of Knives wasn't as well written or plotted as Erikson's stuff, certainly. Return of the Crimson Guard, however, is very much like one of Erikson's novels, just a little less polished and with the occasional clumsy sentence or scene change. It could easily fit in as part of the series.

Finished NoK last night. I agree with the general consensus that RotCG was better written. Still, it was interesting to see how it all started. Well, not how *all* of it started, but you know what I mean.

I did kind of wonder at his choice of POV characters, particularly Kiska. Her story is compelling, but it was kind of annoying that she mostly didn't really know what she was looking at -- made the events harder for the reader to follow. Especially since we never see her again in the series (right?), she just seemed an odd choice as a main POV character. I did like Temper and wish he'd been worked into the storyline in other books. Ah well.

She makes a brief non-speaking cameo in the Bonehunters, and appears in a few scenes of RotCG.

Temper also made a brief appearance in tBH.

both are in RotCG

I was wondering about that. Temp = Temper? Though I thought he had to stay by the Deadhouse, unless I'm forgetting and someone else took over that job. (Now that I think of it, someone did, didn't they? A marine, maybe in tBH.)

This is what I get for only reading the books after MT once each, heh.

I knew I could count on you guys to set me straight. I think I need one of Topper's mind-maps. I'm not going to make any myself, mind you -- too much work!

Haven't read any posts in this thread. Starting the book tonight, and embarking on a total reread. Maybe I'll be able to find DoD when I'm done. (No idea if it's even available here yet...probably not...but at least the story will be fairly fresh when it is.)

--A

Well, finished NoK, and overall, enjoyed it a lot. The writing and story is simpler, but it rolls along quite well with only a couple of disconcerting POV switches. Temper of course was great, and I enjoyed the different take of Tayschrenn too.

Since I just finished Bakker's Prince of Nothing, I didn't notice any real jarring of styles, not being fresh from other Erikson. Starting GotM now, (just into the prologue), and I can see a little difference, but I actually liked the style of NoK.

--A

me too Av

I just finished Night of Knives, and it is the first of the Malazan stories that I have read, I liked it very much, and believe that I have alot of intense reading ahead of me. I think Temper was my favorite character, and once I finished I found myself in awe of the realm I had just stumbled through. I look forward to reading Eriksons work, and have just begun Gardens of the Moon.

Hahaha, enjoy the ride.

--A

Finished this book yesterday! I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Great! Truthfully, for me, it's the least of all Malazan books. Smallest, for sure, which may have something to do with it. But still great. And I like the characters we see here that we don't see much of elsewhere.

I liked it because it was nice to see how it all started. Writing-wise though, I think RotCG is a better book. And of course, the events in it have more of an (unknown) impact on the main series.

--A