Rakov Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Assassinn trilogy or something like that by Robin Hobb. Just boring. Wasnt bad but after reading Eldest by Paolini and others it paled in comparison. Harman, I AM SPEECHLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!! Paolini isn't even in Hobb's car park let alone her ball park as a writer. Liking one or other is simply subjective, but as for skill as a writer, it isn't even open to any discussion. It's a no-brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LokiV Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Nickel & Dimed. What shoddy journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint777 Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Saint you might try out Michael Crichton's, Prey - I enjoyed it. I read and loved Jurassic Park but hated The Lost World and didn't care much for Sphere. Isn't Prey the one about killer viruses? I was considering on picking that one up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Harman, I AM SPEECHLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!! Paolini isn't even in Hobb's car park let alone her ball park as a writer. Liking one or other is simply subjective, but as for skill as a writer, it isn't even open to any discussion. It's a no-brainer. Agreed. I am not a fan of Hobb's and find her books overblown and overlong. Nevertheless, she has some skill with characterisation and installing emotional investment in her books. It does seem to be common consensus that Paolini is a no-talent hack who has never had an original thought in his entire life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackaxx Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Some will defend it to the death but there are plenty of people like us who found it boring. Some will even claim you aren't smart enough if you don't like it. Just because something is boring doesn't mean that something is good. I'm glad you were able to get that off your chest. Yep, not smart enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedEyedGhost Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Is anybody else starting to think that 'harmon' is Paolini?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakov Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Is anybody else starting to think that 'harmon' is Paolini?? Aha! Eureka moment, RedEyedGhost! Although if I were a betting man I would bet on it being his dad, since he manufactured the myth and the media package of Paolini with consummate mastery until the big guys in publishing took it over. And you could post chunks of it here like GoodGodKind's stuff and genereate 15-page long threads in response. It's Kiddie Lit. the prologue alone of Eragon should have a public health warning about stylistic cliche, let alone content. What an amazing world we live in: anything is possible, it seems. 'The Shade'??? I mean, come on! 'An owl screeched' FFS! It gets worse: 'No one relaxed until the bird flew past'. Whaaaaaaaaaat!!!? 'He blinked in surprise. The message had been correct; they were here. Or was it a trap? He weighed the odds, then said icily, “Spread out; hide behind trees and bushes. Stop whoever is coming . . . or die.†- Oh, puuuuuuuurlease! 'On the first horse was an elf with pointed ears and elegantly slanted eyebrows. His build was slim but strong, like a rapier. A powerful bow was slung on his back. A sword pressed against his side opposite a quiver of arrows fletched with swan feathers.' Nice to know the old standards are being reinveted and the fantasy genre is alive and well, with new writers constantly reinvigorating its well-worn contents. 'Then the monsters shivered in the cold night; one snapped a twig with his heavy boot. The Shade hissed in anger, and the Urgals shrank back, motionless. He suppressed his distaste—they smelled like fetid meat—and turned away. They were tools, nothing more.' "They're monsters, you see, so they are all sort of, well, you know, urgaly gurgaly daddy; they are monsters and they make those urgaly gurgaly noises - I've got it, daddy: I'll call them Urgals!" (If you look closely, you will notice that word is made up partly of the word 'gals'. This is no mistake. It is of deep-rooted psychological significance. Underlying all is that thought: gals. Chris, ya need to get laid, mate. Live some life.) OMG! But wait a sec: some witty, post-modern self-reference in that last sentence, perhaps? 'They were tools, nothing more'. Apart from the obvious psycho-sexual meaning, it is also a profound insight into the relationship between the writer and the buying reader, perhaps? I think I was wrong about Paolini. I take it all back!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponine Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Kal, what do you find so great about the characters? I mean, just because whats-her-name is an uncommon stereotype, doesn't mean she's not a stereotype. She's just a boring, inactive, indecisive two-dimensional character instead of a perky, brave, warrior-princess two-dimensional character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Kal, what do you find so great about the characters? I mean, just because whats-her-name is an uncommon stereotype, doesn't mean she's not a stereotype. She's just a boring, inactive, indecisive two-dimensional character instead of a perky, brave, warrior-princess two-dimensional character. The captain of the guard is so greatly fucked up yet does so many good things. She's indecisive, the main protagonist is totally incompetent, the king is inactive, the villains are smart, and the world is well-realized with rules that make sense. The folks surrounding the king are all realized, different and ultimately flawed characters. Donaldson does emotionally fucked up characters better than anyone; this is one of the only books of his where the characters aren't so fucked up that they're totally unsympathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoP Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Some will defend it to the death but there are plenty of people like us who found it boring. Some will even claim you aren't smart enough if you don't like it. Just because something is boring doesn't mean that something is good. I'm glad you were able to get that off your chest. I'm glad someone mentioned this series because I was reticent to do it off my own bat. I managed to finish TDTCB and liked it well enough. I didn't see what all the fuss was about but it was a serviceable novel and the writing was rather good for a debut. But I've only managed to get about 170 pages into TWP - this book just bored me to tears. I didn't care for any of the characters (in that none of them evoked much of ANY emotion in me), the supporting characters just blurred into a big smear, the plot was plodding, the world was not as revolutionary as I had been led to believe and worst of all, Bakker's writing quality took a massive nosedive from the first book. All in all, I think this will become the second book I'll give up on without completing it, leaving it in the esteemed company of Swainston's The Year of Our War. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquireThomas Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Because of a plane ride - Congo, Michael Crichton. I knew it was going to be bad, but I didn't know it was going to be so horrifically bad. You thought that was bad, watch the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not another Stark Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 You thought that was bad, watch the movie. 2 hours of my life I want back Harman: Coupled with his stellar performance in the General board, I'd think it's an old regular pulling our legs - in which case I might have some suspicions on his identity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakov Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 Harman: Coupled with his stellar performance in the General board, I'd think it's an old regular pulling our legs - in which case I might have some suspicions on his identity Thank you, Not another Stark. That possibility just might restore my will to live. I can see some semblance of reason beyond the unbearable, horrific possibility of Paolini being though of as good fantasy Lit and good Lit., full stop. A glass of red wine to accompany your post and all's just about well with the world again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Roses Posted November 23, 2006 Share Posted November 23, 2006 I'm glad someone mentioned this series because I was reticent to do it off my own bat. I managed to finish TDTCB and liked it well enough. I didn't see what all the fuss was about but it was a serviceable novel and the writing was rather good for a debut. I managed to finish TDTCB but not really impressed. I just found it rather pretenious and full of its own cleverness which narked me off. Some good stuff in it but I don't have the patience or time to read the rest of the trilogy and the fact that there is more to come is frankly depressing. Much prefered Scott Lynch and Abercombie (whose reading this thread at the moment so must say nice things!). Enjoyed all my non fantasy reading this year - no real howlers at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackaxx Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 TDTCB In the running for crappiest laziest acronym, ever. I mean, c'mon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derfel Cadarn Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 The last book by Hobb. I've still to finish it. She ends the first one in the new series relatively upbeat, kinda bitter-sweet. And then basically bins that ending in the next book. Semi-expected but I've not been too impressed. Digital Fortress by Dan Brown. The 3rd of his books that I've read. They are all the same. Huge complex stuff to 'wow' the reader into thinking it's an intelligent book. That then falls to the wayside for a formulaic plot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigei Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Mirror of Her Dreams has a good world and magic system unlike anything else before or since. It wasn't that enjoyable but the second book in the duology was much better, IMHO and when I went back and re-read Mirror I enjoyed it on that second read. *shrugs* I like the stuff that happens on the second book, not the first. Recent poor read - I have not really read anything really horrible except for one Lauryn K Hamilton (or is it Laurell? I am trying to forget everything about it). It was one of a series of books with a female main character who is necromancer and has a werewolf and vampire lovers. The first chapter was incredible, simply incredible. The vampire guy is supposed to be sexy but the description of his clothes made me laugh just *so* *so* hard that i nearly ruptured something because it sounded totally gay. I don't remember the details but it was like thigh high boots, short shorts, unbuttoned billowy shirt and in a ridiculous color combination like purple, green, red. He must look like a drag queen and I clearly remember thinking that if he was real, people on the street must go up to him and slap him in face all the time. OK, I am probably inventing this since I forgot what it really was, something too horrible to remember properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diva Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Not recent, but I think that Mirror of her Dreams (or something like that) by Stephen Donaldson was the worst fantasy book I ever read. I'd rate it worse than Goodkind. I don't know about 'worse than Goodkind', but it is up there as one of the worst books I read (especially as it was a recommendation from someone whose taste in reading matter I usually like) I found Teresa's inability to believe or know if she really existed so pathetic and insipid that I wasn't able to finish the book. Which was a shame in some respects, I really liked the king and wanted to know what games he was playing (figuratively as well as literally). And also not recent but a warning: 'An Ancient Future' by Traci Harding is so bad it is in the 'would rather stab my eye out with a rusty razorblade' category. Crappy characters, dreadful story, and those infamous time travelling celtic ninjas. And she got a 5 book deal! However, I did recommend it to my friends for a while, in the hope to share the pain and suffering around a bit. Unfortunately noone fell for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Roses Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 In the running for crappiest laziest acronym, ever. I mean, c'mon... Blame the author - he should have thought of something snappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harman Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Agreed. I am not a fan of Hobb's and find her books overblown and overlong. Nevertheless, she has some skill with characterisation and installing emotional investment in her books. It does seem to be common consensus that Paolini is a no-talent hack who has never had an original thought in his entire life. eeeenhhhhh. WRONG. Both of you. Paolini does have the skills. Its just his popularity that makes you people blind with hate. I mean making fun of the guy saying he hasnt been laid and only got where he is cuz of his daddy reeks of petty jealously and quite frankly makes you people seem like jerks and losers. I have no problem if you dont like Eragon. To each his own. Differnt strokes and floats of boats. Its when you attack thiose who do like Eragon and Paloini and call them stuupid and unintelliegent. MANY people who desrve our respect enjoy Paolini's work immensely. I know 3 marines who love Eragon as well as my aunt who is a big deal cardiologist. Also some teachers, a chemist, and other good people. I know some who dont but they dont go arounfd downong those who like it. Like I dont go around calling Hobb likers morons. Many people consider Martin a "hack" and his work to be a conceptual mess. How does that make you feel? Show some repect for once in yuor miserable lives. Paolini is a nice guy and a hard worker. Lay off the kid and find something better to do than bash him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.