Jul 24
Danreading books
Last week, I finished reading The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss
I enjoyed it, although I had several issues with it. It read much more like a setup than a standalone story. The climax felt tacked on and didn’t really resolve much. The hero has a nigh endless list of virtues, and his flaws tend to be of the flaws-that-are-actually-strengths variety (he doesn’t actually
say “I can’t adequately conceal how awesome I am, which insecure people find threatening” but you can tell he’s thinking it). The love interest is kind of a head-scratcher for me, too — she doesn’t really do anything that makes her appealing as a character, but the protagonist constantly drools over her, and the story-in-a-story structure is used to say that she’s literally indescribable. Despite those complaints, I did like the book. I think that, since I’m working on my own writing, I am becoming hypercritical. In some ways that’s making me feel better about my own work — if he can get published with “obvious” problems like these, maybe I have a shot, too!
Earlier today, I finished Mistborn by Brandon Sanderson.
I liked it a lot, although my hypercritical mind picked up on a few issues here, too. There are two primary viewpoint characters through the first part of the book, but I occasionally felt like the switches from one to another weren’t crisp enough — since both characters tend to interact a lot in the same locations you don’t have as many cues that something has changed, so on more than one occasion I didn’t pick up on the viewpoint shift until a few paragraphs into a new section, which I found jarring. He also turned a side character into a minor viewpoint character more than three quarters of the way into the book, which struck me as odd — I think I would have preferred to either have snippets of this viewpoint throughout or to never have this viewpoint at all, just to have a more consistent way to interact with the character as a reader. I also got lost and disoriented in a few of the action scenes because they focused heavily on the use of magical powers that don’t have strong frames of reference in normal human experience. In some ways they felt like modern quick-cut action movie scenes that neglect establishing shots — unless you know exactly what’s going on it’s easy to get lost. I also didn’t get a strong sense of geography in the story (there’s “the city” and “the mansion in the next town over”) but I found that reassuring rather than offputting since that’s one of the things I’m most worried about in my own writing, and if epic fantasy superstar Brandon Sanderson can get away with it… Despite my nit-picking I did enjoy
Mistborn and I’ve already started reading the second book in the series.
Jul 20
Dandesigning, reading, rpg, writing
After a playtest session last night (playtest report coming soon!), Lenny Balsera challenged me with the question: “What do you love about Epic Fantasy?” It’s a good question that I don’t have a well-articulated answer for, but I should since it’s my favorite literary genre, I’m designing an epic fantasy game, and I’m writing epic fantasy novels. I’m still working out exactly what I believe, but here is what I’ve come up with so far.
I have a few quotes that will hopefully help me make my point. The first is about fantasy in general, rather than epic fantasy in particular, but I really like it. In the denouement of the brilliant Hogfather by Terry Pratchett, Susan and Death (who speaks in ALL CAPS) discuss why it is important for the children of the Discworld to believe in the Hogfather, their equivalent of Santa Claus:
“All right,” said Susan. “I’m not stupid. You’re saying that humans need . . . fantasies in order to make life bearable.”
REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE.
“Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little–”
YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.
“So we can believe the big ones?”
YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING.
“They’re not the same at all!”
YOU THINK SO? THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF JUSTICE, ONE MOLECULE OF MERCY. AND YET– Death waved a hand. AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME . . . SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED.
“Yes, but people have got to believe that, or what’s the point–”
MY POINT EXACTLY.
Fantasy helps us believe in important, real things – things that we might feel hokey about expressing in our modern, cynical world, but things which are nonetheless vital to us. Fantasy is a way of looking at ideas, ideals, themes, and philosophies that are all-too-easy to believe don’t fit in our everyday lives. So what about epic fantasy? That’s a bit harder since the genre isn’t well defined, but everyone agrees that The Lord of the Rings qualifies. Here’s a quote from the movie version of The Two Towers:
Frodo: I can’t do this, Sam.
Sam: I know. It’s all wrong. By rights we shouldn’t even be here. But we are. It’s like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo; the ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger, they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end… because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was, when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines, it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you, that meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going… because they were holding on to something.
Frodo: What are we holding on to, Sam?
Sam: That there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.
For me, what distinguishes epic fantasy is the scope of the threat. I think that the core of an epic fantasy story is a protagonist defending what is good about the world (for some definition of “the world”) from forces that would destroy it. It’s about linking personal action and personal virtue to bigger and broader things, things worth saving. In the cynical world we live in, for big issues and small, it seems like there is a constant pressure to be small-minded, hopeless, and complacent. Dishonest politician? They’re all like that. Your boss wants you to start cutting corners to hit an impossible deadline? Nobody will trace it back to you. There’s a problem that will fester if you don’t have a conversation about it? Best to avoid the potential conflict… Epic fantasy heroes don’t give in to that: they stand against the tide of evil. Epic fantasy stories don’t tell us that it’s easy to do that, because it’s usually not, but they tell us that it’s right to do that, and it’s nice to get that reminder from time to time. Fantasy helps up believe in difficult ideas, and the difficult idea that epic fantasy asks us to believe is that individual virtues matter, that doing the right thing matters. Sam Gamgee saved a world by being a good friend. Sure, it was a fantasy world and not a real one, but Tolkien made it real enough for us to see the truth and importance of that idea. When so many forces in the world want us to believe that everything is going downhill and there’s nothing any of us can do about it, I’m glad that Epic Fantasy is out there saying “You shall not pass!” and reminding us that we all have the capacity to stand for what’s right, in big ways and small.
Plus, there’s wizards and magic and sword fights and a bunch of other awesome stuff.
Mar 13
Danreading books
I recently finished Linchpin by Seth Godin.
It was a good read with a lot of interesting ideas. It’s largely a manifesto about the world no longer rewarding people for acting like cogs in a machine. I’m very sympathetic to that line of thinking (I’ve quit two jobs partially because I felt that my managers were more concerned with forcing me into their preconceived notions of what someone with my job should be rather than dealing with me as an individual with particular strengths and weaknesses). He also has some interesting things to say about “the resistance”, our subconscious attempt to sabotage ourselves and stay stagnant. However, I think he’s overestimating the willingness of bosses to allow employees to cast off their cog-like ways, and also underestimating the difficulty for some people of making meaningful connections with others (but maybe he’s right and these are just things I tell myself to keep myself in my rut…).
I think he does a little bit of handwaving over the actual “money changing hands” part of things. I’m simplifying a bit, but he says that “giving gifts” (such as creating art, or expending emotional labor on someone) is more emotionally connecting than engaging in transactions, and that de-focusing from a transactional business relationship will tend to result in more money in the long term. I sort of agree with that (it’s similar to the whole “people pay for Starbucks coffee because they enjoy the Starbucks experience” thing), but you do need some business transactions happening or the money doesn’t move. As someone who’s hoping to make a living based off of creative output, figuring this puzzle out is very important to me.
The most challenging idea in the book is that it may be a fool’s errand to find a way to make money with something you are passionate about, and it’s easier to find work that makes money that you can become passionate about. This makes a lot of sense, but it’s kind of a criticism of the approach I’m currently taking in my life…
Overall, a well-written and thought-provoking book.
Feb 25
Danreading books
I just finished Switch by Chip and Dan Heath.
It’s about implementing change, whether in individuals, groups, or large organizations. It’s got some really interesting stuff in it, and it will take me a while to fully digest it and start incorporating the ideas into my life. The suggestions they make seem to resonate well with things I’ve figured out independently in my own life (such as some of the techniques I’ve been using to lose weight, which I plan to blog about more on Saturday), so I’m guessing that their other ideas are also going to work well. It’s definitely the most thought-provoking book I’ve read in a while.
Feb 18
Danreading books
I just finished
The Alchemist’s Apprentice by Dave Duncan. I enjoyed the writing style, the characterization of the main character, and the setting (slightly-fantasy renaissance Venice). I found the “mystery” aspect a little hard to follow, but I’m not a big mystery fan, so that may be a fault of mine rather than the novel.
Feb 02
Danreading books
I just finished the latest Wheel of Time book, The Gathering Storm by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson.
I really enjoyed it, but I was a bit lost at times because it’s been so long since I read the previous book. One criticism that I have to agree with about the Wheel of Time is that there are too many characters, and too many of their names are too similar. The most egregious example I noticed was that the end of one chapter talked about the character Shemerin in the rebel Aes Sedai camp and the next chapter featured the character Sheriam in the rebel Aes Sedai camp. Definitely
not the same character, but it took me a few pages to catch on… Even with the problems, I enjoy this series and think this was a great addition to it.
Jan 22
Danreading books
Recently, I finished reading Unseen Academicals by Terry Pratchet.
I enjoyed it, but I think that is in large part because I love the Discworld series rather than the merits of this particular book. I found the “football” stuff had very little resonance for me (not being British or interested in organized sports probably contributes to that), and the character of Nutt was very thinly drawn. I did notice a tendency for the POV to wander from one character to another within a scene, which I had heard was more accepted in British fiction than in American, but hadn’t really observed in practice before.
I also finished The Wyrmling Horde by David Farland.
I had been reading this series in hardcover, but after the shift in direction the story took with Worldbinder I’m glad I waited for paperback for this one. There was some interesting action, and it was interesting to read some of the character POV stuff as they were tempted by power, but the “romance” angle between Talon and Emir Tul Raa fell flat for me, and the “binding the shadow worlds” stuff is far less interesting than the ideas inherent in the basic Runelord magic that are falling by the wayside in the story. I’m not sure if I’ll continue with the series or not.
Dec 19
Danreading books
I recently finished reading the Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling.
As an aspiring author, I felt obligated to read the first one to at least have some familiarity with the series, but I was immediately hooked and ran through the entire series. I thought the beginning and middle were superior to the ending, and thought that the final book was a bit of a disappointment, but overall I really enjoyed it.
I saw the movies first, but I think the series works far better in book form because the point-of-view lets you get inside Harry’s head. For example, I really disliked the Goblet of Fire movie. It seemed like they were playing up the “mystery” of whether or not Harry put his name in the goblet, and the rift that caused between Harry and Ron. In the book, it’s made clear that Harry understands why Ron is acting the way he is, and Ron’s attitude makes a lot more sense than in the movie where he just seems like a petty jerk.
As well written as Harry Potter is, there are parts that frustrate me. For example, the “rules” of how magic works, and what problems can or can’t be solved with magic, are never really explained, and sometimes when they are explained they don’t make much sense (such as how the Elder Wand works in book 7). The characters are pretty well done, though (my favorites are probably stressed-out Hermione in book 3, and Luna Lovegood throughout).
RSS