the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Spoilerful question about the trilogy's end posted 27 Jan 2006, 01:01 by Cythraul, Commoner

This is an EXCEEDINGLY SPOILERFUL discussion of THE ENDING. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The short of this post is that the ending of [i:33gna11v]The Thousandfold Thought[/i:33gna11v] left me dissatisfied and unhappy, yet I'm presuming to use 'Scott'. My intent is to avoid the cold distance of 'Mr. Bakker'. I loved the books, and I loved Scott's writing, but the ending bothered me. On the one hand, I never got the sense that Scott was particularly interested in leaving his audience happy. Thrilled, terrified, excited, and breathless, but not [i:33gna11v]happy[/i:33gna11v]. On the other... at the same time, without contradiction... I somehow grew convinced that the darkness was only to brighten the dawn. But, no - in the end, we achieved nothing of worth. The apparent best hope for Earwa sits at the peak of his power, and seems well on track to unite all men under his banner. But I never found myself caring about Earwa. I realise Scott must care about Earwa, or he wouldn't have spent [i:33gna11v]decades[/i:33gna11v] writing there, but it didn't come through in the books, for me. I found it to be a horrible place full of horrible people. (I would concede that the real world is also a horrible place full of horrible people, but I'd contend that it's also a wonderful place full of wonderful people - if that latter is true of Earwa, then we never saw it.) So, seeing Kellhus victorious to save it is a lot to swallow. In the end, I didn't care about Earwa, I cared about Achamian. To my mind, he, and no other, was the hero of the story. I have a sneaking suspicion that you would consider Achamian regaining Esmenet to be a cheap and easy ending, and consider his final renunciation of her as a more profound victory - a liberation. I'm conjecturing here, of course. But if that's all he gained, then, over the course of the trilogy, he gained nothing. At the start, he didn't have her. In the end, he has neither her nor himself. And, given the hate that Achamian himself mentions in the final [i:33gna11v]Compendium[/i:33gna11v] excerpt, I doubt he'd disagree with me. What's more, it seemed like the reward of Esmenet was dangled in front of us. To have Esmenet leave with Achamian during that final scene would have been glorious - even audacious. It had been set up earlier - Esmenet seemed, at last, to be free of Kellhus's spell. She [i:33gna11v]feared[/i:33gna11v] to leave him, but in a final scene you're allowed more leeway with your panache - it would have been perfectly reasonable, to my mind, for her to walk out with him. And, so, ultimately, my question is 'why?' Why keep Esmenet from Achamian? Scott's said that [i:33gna11v]The Aspect-Emperor[/i:33gna11v] will be set many years after the trilogy. Do I dare hope that both will still be alive, and that Scott will show more mercy with us regarding them? "You're an angry fan with an unjustified sense of entitlement, and no answer will satisfy you," would be a reasonable response, and I'd not be offended. But I don't believe that's the case. If there are angles I've missed, nuances I'm overlooking, then I'd be happy to listen. view post


Re: Spoilerful question about the trilogy's end posted 27 Jan 2006, 02:01 by Grallon, Candidate

[quote="Cythraul":10xqleem]... What's more, it seemed like the reward of Esmenet was dangled in front of us. To have Esmenet leave with Achamian during that final scene would have been glorious - even audacious. It had been set up earlier - Esmenet seemed, at last, to be free of Kellhus's spell. She [i:10xqleem]feared[/i:10xqleem] to leave him, but in a final scene you're allowed more leeway with your panache - it would have been perfectly reasonable, to my mind, for her to walk out with him. [/quote:10xqleem] Personally I was so tired of that sub-plot - I cheered when Achamian finally renounced her. At long last he was coming to his senses ! The man is a 47 yo sorcerer and teacher - and during the course of 3 books he mooned over that woman like a blubbering teenager. Arghh ! She certainly was an interesting character in her own right but all the languishing was just killing me. Presumably Achamian will still have a role to play in the next trilogy so these 2 might meet again but hopefully Scott will refrain from further emotional entenglements. G. view post


posted 27 Jan 2006, 04:01 by Andrew, Peralogue

Definitely agree with Cythraul. It is hard to care about Earwa other than Achamian. The non-contemptible characters - in my mind, Xinemus, Serwe, Achamian, (and to a lesser extent, Esmenet who is in a terribly harsh bind) seem to die/lose, whereas the brutal characters survive and the character of the world itself is so brutal... For me, the Esmenet - Achamian sub-plot was one of the only one which resonated with real sympathy. view post


posted 27 Jan 2006, 17:01 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Tough crowd! This is a [i:380gpy3b]war[/i:380gpy3b] story about the rise of a master manipulator. I'm not sure it's fair to generalize from the story to Earwa as a whole. The only difference between it and our own world, I would say, is that it's moral turmoil is an out and out objective feature of the world. As for Esmenet and Achamian, their story is far from over. These are the kind of books, I think, that look [i:380gpy3b]really[/i:380gpy3b] different depending on what your reading perspective happens to be. If, for instance, interior narratives leave you cold, you will think the attention paid to Esmenet and Achamian's relationship tedious. Or if you find it easier to identify with ideal types, rather than psychologically complicated characters, you will think no one is 'likable.' If you think ease-of-reading trumps realism, you'll think the names are 'too hard.' If you think fantastic action sequences are infantile, you'll think the story is fluff. And the list goes on and on. All I can hope is that the story is compelling enough to convince some readers to take a step sideways, perhaps find a new perspective. But for whatever reason, I simply can't seem to write anything that asks the reader to stay put. For better or worse, I'm trying to write something bigger than any pair of eyes. It's inevitable, I think, that it looks ugly from a variety of angles. Hubris, I know... :wink: view post


posted 27 Jan 2006, 19:01 by Jora, Commoner

I love almost every character in the books. I find Xerius and Conphas lovable and Cnaiur extremely interesting. I feel sympathy for Saubon and Achamian, the latter of whom I think is one the best characters in any books ever written. If only Kellhus would have got his ass kicked in the end, at least by Cnaiur who really deserves that priviledge. Scott, you did a masterful job in making every character feel deep and unique. The story is interesting throughout the trilogy, although the number of suprising twists and revelations isn't as great in the third book as in TDtCB and TWP. And this is my biggest gripe with TTT: everything happened pretty much as I expected (and feared :P ). Maybe I would think differently if the Publisher's Weekly review hadn't told what The Thousandfold Thought is. Only the encounter with Moenghus really surprised me (I *love* the part where Kellhus reveals that his dad isn't that much of a sorcerer because of the nature of the Cishaurim magic). I also like the fact that you explained why the Inchoroi and the Consult want to kill everyone so badly. Oh, and contrary to popular opinion, the names are great. Especially Cinganjehoi. Cinganjehoi is cool. view post


posted 27 Jan 2006, 20:01 by Grallon, Candidate

[quote="Cu'jara Cinmoi":1geqagq4]... These are the kind of books, I think, that look [i:1geqagq4]really[/i:1geqagq4] different depending on what your reading perspective happens to be. If, for instance, interior narratives leave you cold, you will think the attention paid to Esmenet and Achamian's relationship tedious. ...[/quote:1geqagq4] It appears my irritation comes, for the greater part, from my personal contempt for romantic attachments. I simply can't understand how a jaded and cynical individual like Achamian ccould fall so deep knowing what he knows about the world. In other words, I 'sinned' by identification since I myself am both jaded & cynical - especially about that particular topic. I suppose it's a further proof of your skill Scott - to have 'gulled' the reader I am into emphasizing with Achamian that way. :) G. view post


posted 27 Jan 2006, 20:01 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Consider yourself sort-of-successfully manipulated then... :wink: view post


posted 28 Jan 2006, 15:01 by Cythraul, Commoner

[quote:3uw8h8zp]This is a war story about the rise of a master manipulator. I'm not sure it's fair to generalize from the story to Earwa as a whole.[/quote:3uw8h8zp] Which is fair. See my point about the possibility of good in Earwa, despite it not showing through. But, again, the effect is that it's hard to get attached to such a place, since the atrocity is all we see. (And the atrocity really [i:3uw8h8zp]was[/i:3uw8h8zp] all we saw. There was no sunshine that didn't fall on horror, no snow that didn't get stained red.) Seeing the good of a character we (read: I) truly cared about sacrificed to save a place that I merely intellectually understood I [i:3uw8h8zp]ought[/i:3uw8h8zp] to care about (but which seldom failed to turn my stomach) wasn't satisfying. Probably intellectually correct, but not satisfying. [quote:3uw8h8zp]As for Esmenet and Achamian, their story is far from over.[/quote:3uw8h8zp] Tell me that shouldn't fill me with dread. Then pull the other one. :wink: [quote:3uw8h8zp]Or if you find it easier to identify with ideal types, rather than psychologically complicated characters, you will think no one is 'likable.'[/quote:3uw8h8zp] I'm trying to keep this from turning into a laundry list of which items in that (examples) list worked for me (most did). But I think you may be missing something with this very point. The issue wasn't the lack of likeable characters - the issue was that the likeable characters got short shrift. The darker the surrounding seas, the more tightly we (again, read: I) cling to what buoys there are. The story is compelling. Despite my misgivings, despite my disappointment, I will read the books that will follow. I probably couldn't read them today - I wouldn't have the belly for it - but (and here's where you get to cackle triumphantly) the story's too good to give up on. [quote:3uw8h8zp]And the list goes on and on.[/quote:3uw8h8zp] Of course. :) And you've got so much going on in the books, you're going to draw in readers with so many different perspectives, that every step is going to make [i:3uw8h8zp]someone[/i:3uw8h8zp] unhappy. I assume you're curiuos about who and how, or you wouldn't bother with a forum like this. (I also realise you invite a world of aggravation, and I'm trying not to add to it. I'm familiar with the image of an author opening a vein into his typewriter.) view post


posted 28 Jan 2006, 16:01 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

You have to remember that I spent years in philosophy. Though I bristle on occasion, it's the absence of critical resistance that freaks me out the most. The books are far from perfect from my perspective as well, but - and perhaps this is just flattering rationalization on my part - they seem to be all more profound for those imperfections. I just got the feeling that these books, though they likely won't win any awards or make any bestseller lists, will be around for a long time to come. They really do feel bigger than me. view post


posted 28 Jan 2006, 17:01 by Andrew, Peralogue

Apropos of your last comment Scott, i don't wish to be taken to not have enjoyed TTT. Your books have been far and away the most entertaining, gripping and stimulating fantasies i've ever read. I bought Prince of Nothing due to Steve Erickson's endorsement, not expecting to find a series i would enjoy even more than his! I originally had the idea, just as you said, that the history of a war will be brutal, and so from that perspective one does not expect to see anything redeeming in the actions of the players. My greater pessimism regarding the world comes when you delve into the personal histories of the characters. Like Achamian's recollection of his drunken abusive father. Esmenet revealing that she sold her daughter into slavery. Ikurei Xerius (love the names but dang, trying to spell them from memory is hard) and his bizarre relationship with his mother - no wonder he's a cracked nut. The dialogue, thoughts and fates of those two urchins who witness Maithanet's departure. The Dunyain culling their defectives and subjecting them to a life in chains and agony. The sorceries which seem bent entirely to agony and destruction. all these small personal horrors and tragedies sprinkled throughout the books make me think, would it be so bad if the Inchoroi slaughter 99%, then eventually die themselves along with their creatures, and let the 1% human remnant emerge from their hidden places and build up a new world with a little more compassion. view post


posted 07 Feb 2006, 20:02 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

What can I say, I'm a Hobbesian. I really do think that pre-modern life was brutal, short, and characterized by arbitrary violence and exploitation. Censuses of preliterate societies, for instance, suggest that our idyllic pictures of humans 'living in harmony with each and nature' are romantic tripe. Our generation is the anomaly - and in so many ways. It was good talking at the book launch, btw. It was a pretty thin crowd! view post


posted 08 Feb 2006, 01:02 by Cythraul, Commoner

[quote:3qkt0ife]suggest that our idyllic pictures of humans 'living in harmony with each and nature' are romantic tripe.[/quote:3qkt0ife] No one's asking for harmony here. (Well, no one's really /asking/ anything - I, for one, am following up on my gut reaction, while fending off the spectre of Comic Book Guy.) To be fair, I'm naturally bringing huge biases to the table - despite my attempts at a Heinlein-ish balance, I'm far more likely to err on the side of the romantic. I certainly had fun! The thin crowd isn't a terrible surprise, given the weather. The new Bakka-Phoenix location is a pain to get to by public transit... I'm waiting to see if my friend will be willing to let me pass the pictures along; I only got to see them on the back of the camera, but they looked good to me. (The low camera angle makes those pics look positively mountainous.) view post


posted 08 Feb 2006, 01:02 by Cythraul, Commoner

.... where by "those pics", I of course mean "those stacks of books". view post


posted 08 Feb 2006, 14:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I had hoped to attend the book launch at Bakka bu unfortunately I had prior commitements that I couldn't get out of honourably. Planning on going to the Reading at U of T though, looks interesting. view post


posted 09 Feb 2006, 01:02 by Inner_visions, Candidate

Personaly, I felt the ending was what I always want in an ending; definite. It ended the 'main' character's progression and evolution throughout the story. I find that in the fantasy that I read it usually doesnt end with such closure and since this series was the most hard-hitting series that i've read, I think I needed it. I came to theses forums today out of a beaten curiosity, not because I was un-satisfied by the endings. BTW i never personaly expected anything good to come, why should it? The war took it's toll on everyone. People were asked to give untill they thought they couldn't. I'm just doing WWI in my socials class and I thought that the depiction in this book was amazing. It hit me as hard as anything i've read pertaining to war. The clash of entire populations! FOR LAND NO LESS! So ridiculous when brought into my logical path. Another btw to the original post by Cythraul: I think we saw lots of good in the books, and in the only places we were probably going to see it; it was in the hearts of the main characters. Esmenet and Achaiman's love in the second book especially seemed a joyous thing. When compared to everyday North American and European life then yes, it's horrible but I agree with Scott in thinking that life was horrible. We still have the infrastructure of the caste system in NA but it's more deeply hidden, or why would GWB countinue to pursue tax cuts for the richest people when he's giving a heavier load to students and the middle class? Especially since he's already in debt a ton? In regards to Esmenet, what did you think she was going to do? I thought her actions and her view on Kellhus made it pretty clear what was going to happen at the end of the day. She pretty much did everything but explicitely said she was going to go back to Kellhus. As for [quote:3n8jpz6f]The man is a 47 yo sorcerer and teacher - and during the course of 3 books he mooned over that woman like a blubbering teenager. Arghh ! [/quote:3n8jpz6f] it was directly stated by Esmenet no less as to why he was so 'innocent' in his love; he had nothing else. He clinged to her. Anyway, I hope that Achaiman pursues sorcery now that he's freed up so much of his time. (being that he doesn't have anything else) *sry about the rant, I should have taken more time to make the writting more coherent and what-not but I simply dont have time today. Hopefully my next post will be better* view post


posted 17 Feb 2006, 17:02 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Love without desperation? Certainly not for people as emotionally scarred as Achamian and Esmenet. view post


An Answer to "Happy Endings" posted 24 Feb 2006, 13:02 by Kidruhil Lancer, Auditor

Now, granted, I don't have even half the literary or philisophical background of most people on this forum, but here are my two cents anyway. I saw a few people mention how disheartened they were by the dark quality of the PON series. Personally, I love the fact that there are no happy endings. When alot of other writer's in this genre flirt with the faery-tale formula of "love, and happy endings", it's great to see a few author's who are willing to break away from that flow and risk alienating their readers. When I say a few, the three I have in mind are Martin , Bakker, and Erikson. There may or may not be other's. If there are, I haven't read them yet. And of the ones I have read, these three are the best. I can't speak for everyone else to reads these stories, so I will briefly outline why I enjoy these three authors so much. Tragedy just seems to resonate so much more powerfully than a happy ending. Even with Tolkien, I found myself enjoying the Silmarillion with its tragically heroic figures and its tales of falling iconic cities, more so than I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings trilogy itself. It was that sense of pain and loss that really drove the story for me, and helped me to identify with the characters that were swept up in it. I feel this way about the PON series. For me, all the other characters don't matter. I didn't connect in a meaningful way with anyone except for Achamian. And even though he didn't "get the girl", I still love the end of the book. For me, it opens up a whole horizen of possibilities for the future. So, even though the story didn't have a happy ending, I don't think it really matters. Frankly, if you were hoping for even the smallest bit of sunshine, you're in the wrong genre. And as for the world seeming so harsh and cruel, it seems to me that the question of whether the Inchoroi SHOULD be allowed to destroy most of humanity, just might be what Scott is shooting for at some point. Who knows. Alright, I've babbled enough on an old thread. view post


posted 24 Feb 2006, 19:02 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

It's ok Kidruhil, I totally agree with you. :) The dark and gritty fascinates me more as a reader than the "happy ending." Sure I "root" for the good guy when I am reading but you know just once I'd love to read a series of novels where good doesn't triumph. Maybe I'm just a twisted cynic :) But I'd love to have the last chapter of a nice dark, gritty series involve the death of the hero and triumph of evil :) view post


posted 25 Feb 2006, 00:02 by Andrew, Peralogue

[quote="Cu'jara Cinmoi":3qp5ijax]What can I say, I'm a Hobbesian. I really do think that pre-modern life was brutal, short, and characterized by arbitrary violence and exploitation. Censuses of preliterate societies, for instance, suggest that our idyllic pictures of humans 'living in harmony with each and nature' are romantic tripe. Our generation is the anomaly - and in so many ways. It was good talking at the book launch, btw. It was a pretty thin crowd![/quote:3qp5ijax] Now Scott, lets be honest - Hobbes was NOT talking about the andiamine heights! I do agree re: excessive romantic stereotypes but the 3 seas is hardly an image of the state of nature. Even the Scyclvendi are beyond that!!! Come to Winnipeg Scott - dang but i'd like to meet you! Look for the short guy in a suit with curly hair! view post


posted 25 Feb 2006, 04:02 by Cu Roi, Candidate

Yes the world of Earwa is gritty and ultimately harsh, yet to me that has been the whole point of the series. The first book in the trilogy is named after the unseen desires and cultural weight that drive men to action. Few in the world ever actually try to sit down and become self-aware. They never turn a critical eye towards what drives them. This creates the world we live in. Take a look outside your harried life and look at the world. It's not a serene place, filled with happy endings & justice, though there are moments. It may never be, entirely. This is the result of the darkness that comes before. It's no different in Earwa or on Earth. There are no "pure" characters in the PoN, simply because each character is rendered with the appetites that real people contain. As is stated in TTT, we are all at war with ourselves. Our desires are legion and compete against each other. Take Achamian, the most sympathetic character, he lets himself be sidetracked and distracted by his desire for a single woman, while the fate of his world teeters on the precipice. Cnaiur himself sees his murderous actions from a distance. He doesn't grasp his own behavior, though he endlessly tries to, where as most others trudge blindly ahead. Esmenet, though I'll be declared a mysogynist for this, she behaves as the majority of women would and I dare say do. Choosing safety, security, & power over love. Many people, not just women do. It may anger the romantics, myself among them, but it's true. It is precisely all of these unseen motivators that allow Khellus to manipulate. He can see and discern thier passions, and use them as handles to move them as he wishes. He may not be moral or likeable, but he is effective, and sees the bigger picture. He sees the threat to the world and moves down the shortest path to save it. For redemption to be possible later, survival now is the most important goal. He is the salt of rationality needed. At least he has been. We'll see how he fares in the future. All of this is wonderful, because it should shine a light on our world. Allow us the chance to think about what drives us. Give us the chance to carve away some of the barnacles we've inherented from the darkness. It should give us the impetus to see a little farther. All that, and it's just damn cool to boot! War Cants & Wracu & Heron Spears...how cool is all that!!! It's philosophy & intense social commentary ...wrapped in bacon. Tasty! view post


posted 28 Feb 2006, 12:02 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

[quote:tpgqgs7i]All that, and it's just damn cool to boot! War Cants & Wracu & Heron Spears...how cool is all that!!! It's philosophy & intense social commentary ...wrapped in bacon. Tasty![/quote:tpgqgs7i] But is good for the [i:tpgqgs7i]heart[/i:tpgqgs7i], Cu Roi... :wink: I guess the real question is whether it's unrealistic in its anti-sentimentalism. This is one of the things I'm not inclined to the bite the bullet on. If anything, I think I was too [i:tpgqgs7i]kind[/i:tpgqgs7i]. Modern life has robbed us of many things, sure, but I for one, would not want to go back. Like I think I said in some interview somewhere, I wanted to show people the wages of their wonder. Sounds pompous to me now, but I stand by it. view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 01:03 by stormchaser, Candidate

I have just finished reading TTT, in fact I put the book down less than an hour ago as I write this. While I liked the series as a whole, I must admit to being another reader who initially had a rather negative reaction to the ending. In fact my first reaction on completing TTT was basically a loud mental "WTF???" The ending left me feeling cheated and puzzled. My admiration for what came before (if you will permit me to use a familiar phrase) led me here to this forum in search of some answers. Trust me, I read a lot of fantasy and this is not something I ever do, so it's clear the book had a very strong effect on me. Browsing this forum for the fist time has answered a few of my questions and blunted some of my criticisms, but not all. Basically, the ending only makes sense to me if the author was planning on writing more about these events, and indeed I have just discovered that he is. But the question is, was he so planning [i:3a92pp7s]when the ending was written?[/i:3a92pp7s] If so, it does explain a lot of the loose ends, but it seems like a poor way to end a trilogy that one has spent literally decades creating. It’s as if Tolkien had shown us the crowning of king Elessar, but not the destruction of the ring. It just doesn’t feel complete. And knowing as I now do that there may be another book in the works, I can’t help feeling like things were deliberately left out so that they could be filled in later. So that is my question for Scott: did you write the ending as it exists with the full knowledge that you were going to return to the world of TPON in a later book? If not, I salute you for writing a marvelously incomplete semi-masterpiece (heh, can you sense my ambivalence about this?). And if so, would you agree that the ending would have been different - would have HAD to be different - if no further work on the series was being considered? view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 02:03 by unJon, Auditor

Stormchaser, Scott originally planned to write a trilogy in which PON would be the first book. He has referred to it as "his Hobbit." Well PON grew into a trilogy in his own right and Scott now envisions that the second two original books will become dualogies (though it wouldn't shock me if they both turned into trilogies). So yes, he planned on writing more in this world, from the beginning, and that is why I think that there are so many unanswered questions. view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 16:03 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Yeah, it was in the cards from the very beginning, Stormchaser, which I think a reread would show quite clearly. I have given my pledge, here and elsewhere, that I WILL NOT deviate from my original narrative outline for the Second Apocalypse. This really isn't a matter of aesthetic scruples for me, but just a consequence of having lived with the story for some twenty years. I literally feel as though my life would be for naught if I don't do it the best way I possibly can, which is very likely not the most lucrative way I could do it. I'm tempted to say that if the ending pissed you off, just wait for the ending ending! :wink: view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 05:03 by stormchaser, Candidate

First of all, let me say that it is absolutely mind-boggling that I can finish reading a major fantasy book, then immediately go to my computer and pose a question to the author, who is a complete stranger, and [i:psujrje4]actually receive a reply within a day!![/i:psujrje4] That is cool beyond words. Thank you very much for the replies, which indeed do explain everything, mostly along lines that had already occurred to me as being probable. So I guess my only real complaint now is with the publisher, who didn't make it clear that TTT was not intended to be read as the culmination of a life's work. I will surely read the rest of the books in the series. Still, I will admit to feeling a certain perverse disappointment that PON was not intended to stand alone. The idea of a dense, intricate, highly literate fantasy, written and developed over the course of many years, that after the grand denouement still leaves huge pieces of the big picture solely to the imagination, and does so quite intentionally... Well, the concept has a certain charm, don't you think? OK, maybe not. :wink: Still, for a moment there, I really thought... Never mind. Anyway, thanx again for the fast reply, it is greatly appreciated. This seems like a pretty lively online community, maybe I'll stick around for a while and check it out. view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 14:03 by xhaldur, Candidate

Scott, I think your books were my greatest find this past year. I haven't enjoyed discovering characters and falling into a story this much since I discovered ASOIAF. The Prince of Nothing sits high upon my list of top book series and I can't wait till the story continues. view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 17:03 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I would argue stomrchaser that the PON is stand alone in the sense that it completely tells the story it was supposed to, being the rise of Kelhus and the story of the Holy War :) Of course anyone who gets hooked on it will see it as the prelude to Aspect Emperor I'm sure and view it more like The Hobbit as opposed to The Lord of the Rings :) view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 19:03 by Edge of Certainty, Subdidact

poor scott, will people ever stop making LotR parallels? I wonder if any books in the future will be called Bakkeresque 8). view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 21:03 by neongrey, Peralogue

[quote="Andrew":205igpn4]Come to Winnipeg Scott - dang but i'd like to meet you! Look for the short guy in a suit with curly hair![/quote:205igpn4] But do it after the snow melts. And I would totally like to support the 'come to Winnipeg' thing. Finished reading the book on the bus today, and... man, I owe you a beer. view post


posted 16 Mar 2006, 23:03 by Entropic_existence, Moderator

[quote="Edge of Certainty":ixe8b2nt]poor scott, will people ever stop making LotR parallels? I wonder if any books in the future will be called Bakkeresque 8).[/quote:ixe8b2nt] I think I've heard Scott make the same analogy I did :) Tolkien is sort of the comparison as far as fantasy goes. Personally I find Scotts work far more interesting though. view post


posted 17 Mar 2006, 00:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

[quote:1agr01sg]I think I've heard Scott make the same analogy I did Smile Tolkien is sort of the comparison as far as fantasy goes. Personally I find Scotts work far more interesting though.[/quote:1agr01sg] I agree far far more interesting. view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown.