Darth Richard II Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Yeah, what? The second apocalypse is known for its lack of humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 12 minutes ago, Leap said: I guess that all depends on what you find funny. Well, yes, I guess if you find the first Alien film a comedic masterpiece, you'd think the 2nd Apocalypse is a hoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghjhero Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 I've got a particularly black sense of humor, so that probably explains it. I don't think there's any situation that's ever existed that I havnt been able to find a way to laugh at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 I guess? That doesn't make it a humorous series or mean that it contains humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghjhero Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 It's all about perspective man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo498 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 As I said, there is a bit of unvoluntarily funny stuff. But his attempts at humorous scenes, e.g. telling, not showing that Kellhus is so funny at the evening campfire (imitating someone or so) that Serwe or others are rolling on the floor with laughter are among the worst scenes in the books, I think, superfluous and embarrasingly bad. The lack of humor is no general problem for me because with these few exceptions Bakker does not even try to be funny, I think. But even by die-hard fans I never saw the series recommended for humor. Whatever, I have not even read anything past the 3rd book but I would not recommend Bakker to a relative newbie, regardless of humor. But with the confusing first fitfh or so of the Prince of Nothing I think they "protect themselves" for those not willing to dig into such stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghjhero Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 I don't understand the stigmatism that tSA isn't for newbies. Sure it's darker than your traditional fantasy, but it's still a great series. Nothing too unwieldy or hard to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 58 minutes ago, Ghjhero said: I don't understand the stigmatism that tSA isn't for newbies. Sure it's darker than your traditional fantasy, but it's still a great series. Nothing too unwieldy or hard to read. For the record, could you give some examples of what you would consider unwieldy or hard to read in Fantasy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghjhero Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 I'd say Malazan was a slog to read. It didn't make sense a lot of them time and it was hard to see how everything was fitting together. Not something I'd recommend to a newbie to fantasy. Only would suggest it to someone who has read fantasy for a long time and was prepared for a challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghjhero Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Double Post oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo498 Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 It's not all that dark, at least not the first book. (Anderson's "The broken sword" is darker, IMO). But it is damn confusing. The first prologue (which is one of the best sections by Bakker I read) seems completely unrelated to the rest. Then we get the longish Kellhus episode, then another one. It does not really get going until the Kellhus and the Cnaiur storylines meet which is a third or more? through the first book. And through the first two books A LOT of things are mysterious and confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Yeah, I uh, am confused. Most Bakker fans I know like it because it is confusing/convoluted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo498 Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 This may be so but then it is conceded that the confusion is a recognized feature of the books and my point was merely that many readers, especially "newbies" who have not read all that much (or not so much in a certain genre) would find this far more off putting than the disgusting bits (of which there is hardly anything in PoN, as far as I recall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
End of Disc One Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I've only read the trilogy so far, and I remember Achamian making a joke once that made me smile (though I don't remember the joke). Otherwise yeah, not a lot of knee-slappers in Bakker's books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Seswatha Jordan Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 2 hours ago, End of Disc One said: I've only read the trilogy so far, and I remember Achamian making a joke once that made me smile (though I don't remember the joke). Otherwise yeah, not a lot of knee-slappers in Bakker's books. That he was going to have his "morning apocalypse"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 am not wanting the RSB to have humor. i want it to be serious, cerebral, tragic, traumatic. and it is those things, beyond measure. ('dark' is kinda a worthless oculocentric metaphor that imperfectly identifies its qualities.) the humor is in the discussion afterward. the most comical post on these boards was in an RSB thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.