Jump to content

The Name of the Wind Thread


wuzzup3003

Recommended Posts

I find particularly laughable the guy editing Wikipedia for the way he keeps using phrases that imply his point of view is the only logical one as if everyone else is going to suddenly slap their forehead and say
It's not Mystar is it? >_>

It can't be Mystar - someone offered up Goodkind as an example of genuinely bad authors in the Amazon thread and there's no way Mystar would let a comment like that pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The book is an odd one for me because I could see the flaws in it but they were all overwhelmed by the sheer joy of the prose- it's one of the most enjoyable books I've ever read. I don't know if I'd give it five stars but it'd certainly be in contention.

But I can see why others wouldn't.

I was the same way. I had to stop reading around chapter 36 or so to email Pat and thank him for writing the story he did. I don't care if parts of it felt like Harry Potter goes to college or that Kvothe was talented or a bit smug. Sure, the city rat/dragon hunting bits dragged on and the story could have been tightened up a little, but I thought for a first novel it was exceptional for a fairly traditional fantasy.

I don't begrudge those who didn't care for it and I'd never alter a review or rating to offset someone else's, but I do think those folk are being a bit silly. If Pat swore to them beforehand that it'll be the best book they ever read, I could understand the criticism, Rothfuss didn't pull a TG though, it really reads like a case of sour grapes over there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone in the discussion thread accused all the alts of being Robert Stanek :D I don't know if that's just on the basis of my speculation here, but it would be hilarious if it was.

I traipsed around Stanek's forum for a bit to see if there was any hatred being levelled towards Name of the Wind and there was none that I could see. I didn't stay long though, it's the forum equivalent of visiting the madhouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone in the discussion thread accused all the antis of beeing Robert Stanek :D I don't know if that's just on the basis of my speculation here, but it would be hilarious if it was.

If it was Stanek, wouldn't he say something like "Rothfuss is the worst writer ever, and not worthy of comparison to such genius authors like Shakespeare or Robert Stanek"? Of course, he could be getting more subtle after his modus operandi was exposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was Stanek, wouldn't he say something like "Rothfuss is the worst writer ever, and not worthy of comparison to such genius authors like Shakespeare or Robert Stanek"? Of course, he could be getting more subtle after his modus operandi was exposed.

I was wondering about this but then I noticed that some of the other reviewers are mentioning GRRM and Tad Williams as viable alternatives, which is exactly the same tactics used by Stanek a few years ago, except that Stanek put his own name on there as well.

The only connections I can see are that the 'Rothfuss is a fraud' title seems to be a direct reference to the 'Stanek is a fraud' discussion on Stanek's review page and this blog post picked up on the situation a few weeks ago, way down in the comments.

It's a very, very bizarre situation. I can't quite fathom it.

EDIT: a second person on Amazon is now saying it's Stanek.

Utterly hilarious, as only the most mind-bogglingly inane and stupid internet shitstorms can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have googled Stanek, read some excerpts, and wish there was a Back button on the browser of my mind.

This is the most siggable thing I've read in a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The book is an odd one for me because I could see the flaws in it but they were all overwhelmed by the sheer joy of the prose- it's one of the most enjoyable books I've ever read.

Absolutely. The actual story is nothing new at all and uses several well-worn tropes, however, the joy in the book for me is the actual prose. I'm a quick reader and I tend to skim read passages in which nothing is happening, but for this book I read every single word. To do otherwise would have been a disservice.

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The book is an odd one for me because I could see the flaws in it but they were all overwhelmed by the sheer joy of the prose- it's one of the most enjoyable books I've ever read.

Absolutely. The actual story is nothing new at all and uses several well-worn tropes, however, the joy in the book for me is the actual prose. I'm a quick reader and I tend to skim read passages in which nothing is happening, but for this book I read every single word. To do otherwise would have been a disservice.

N

This.

I also enjoyed trying to piece together the world in my head, he gave enough to go on without posting the structure in a visio spreadsheet. Winterbirth is similar in that aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

* sprays tea over monitor in disbelief *

The thing on Amazon is still going on, but one of the other commentators pointed out that you can click on the reviewers' names and see all the books they've tagged but not reviewed. And, sure enough, three of them have been busy tagging Stanek's books. Minutes after this was pointed out, the tags started to vanish from their profiles, but that seems to clinch it.

Seriously, what the fuck? :stunned:

EDIT: And it gets better. One of the same reviewers started writing shitty reviews of books by David Louis Edelman and Jim C. Hines, coincidentally two authors who had written significant blog posts during the whole Stanek furore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

* sprays tea over monitor in disbelief *

The thing on Amazon is still going on, but one of the other commentators pointed out that you can click on the reviewers' names and see all the books they've tagged but not reviewed. And, sure enough, three of them have been busy tagging Stanek's books. Minutes after this was pointed out, the tags started to vanish from their profiles, but that seems to clinch it.

Seriously, what the fuck? :stunned:

EDIT: And it gets better. One of the same reviewers started writing shitty reviews of books by David Louis Edelman and Jim C. Hines, coincidentally two authors who had written significant blog posts during the whole Stanek furore.

So wait, it really is Stanek doing this? Un-fucking-believable! The guy is seriously out of his mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So wait, it really is Stanek doing this? Un-fucking-believable! The guy is seriously out of his mind.

Seriously out of his mind. He's been at it for well over a decade - I recall him sharpening his spamming technique on a Tad Williams message board back around '98. Can you imagine what it must be like, writing crap book after crap book, composing fake accounts and praise to one self, then waiting and hoping year after year for those random suckers that will buy your vanity-press excretions? Year after year, and then some "upstart" comes along and generates massive praise and a big contract.

It's sort of hilarious and sad at the same time. Now I feel bad about standing up for those "hypothetical reviewers" right to criticize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were i you, David Bowie, i would simply stop buying from Amazon. This is retarded beyond understanding.

I have stopped buying from amazon. Amazon knows exactly what's going on with Stanek, and it my mind that makes them complicit in fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...