Arakasi Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 He explains most of his stuff, the thing is he doesn't explain it all at once. He fills it in a little bit at a time. Each book you read of his fills in more of your knowledge from previous books. It's definately a consious decision on his part to reveal stuff in that way. For example the dead ship in TDG gets revealed more in both books 4 and 6 to what really happened there. There really isn't that many blanks anymore (not after 6 books), it's just the style on how he reveals things. Heck there are things in book 1 that don't get explained til many books later. I would disagree that most of his characters are strong though. He uses a lot of character archetypes, which is fine for what he is trying to do. The really strong characters imo are Felisin, Duiker, Itkovian, Trull, Cotillion and some others. He does well when he wants to on characters, but a lot of times just uses archetypes on most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 Felisin, the town bicycle? She's a strong character? More than half of the time, she sat back and whined about Beneth. No arguments on the others, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakasi Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 She is a very strongly written character. Ask Lyanna here. Or other female readers. It is very rare for a female character to be written well by a male author. The journey of felisin is yes, one of being used by others and hate and lashing out at others, but to me it is a very realistic portrayal of a woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 By 'strong character,' do you mean 'weakling little harpy who spreads her legs for everyone and everything and constantly whines over the man who explited her while lashing out at her protector?' Because that sums up Felisn throughout all of DHG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakasi Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Umm, if that is all that you got out of the character than I think you might have some issues. (that or you need to read the book closer) But regardless, hate, envy and emotions like that are very real human emotions, and it makes for a strongly drawn character that Erikson has written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Yes. And when all she does in the first book she's in is whine and lash out at people who keep coddling her for some reason, it makes for a detestable character. Brutality and cruelty are very real human traits, but we don't lovingly hail Gregor Clegane, do we/ Characters are not Erikson's strong point and I'll thank you not to insult me personally. Whiskeyjack and Paran are total caricatures and Whiskeyjack is cliche piled on idiot cliche. Erikson's establishment of the Empire is club fisted in some areas (Nobility purges? The end Bonehunters twist? Weak.) He has a good story and a good world. Just good luck caring about almost anyone in it. And for the record? That's all Felisin is for the vast majority of DHG: "Whine, whine, Beneth. Moan, moan, Baudin's a thug." Over and over and over again for chapters and chapters and chapters. I wanted someone to stop coddling that little bitch and finally lay down the facts. Heboric treads on eggshells the entire time and Baudin was no better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakasi Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Saying she spreads her legs for everyone was a bit callous imo. And reducing her character to just being a slut is not what she is, and what I took exception to. The situation is a lot more complex than that. Like I said before, maybe Lyanna will come in here and make her points on Felisin, because she does it better than me. Maybe stop making comments like "the town bicycle" and such if you don't want to come off as umm sexist? You've read the books and you know the situation is much more complex then that. As for insulting you, sorry but you're the one who is saying that stuff. I took exception to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 What would you call it? She sleeps with Beneth, Beneth's friends, anyone Beneth wantsher to sleep with, anyoen she thinks will ebenfit Beneth, all the guards-not just the men- on the ship, even BAUDIN...I didn't say she was just a slut, I said she devolves into a completely whiny wreck of a character who does nothing but moan, whine and bitch on and one for chapters without end. Defend her all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that for long, long, long, LONG times without end, she does practically nothing but sob, whine and insult Baudin. And I'm so sorry if that wasn't politically correct, but seriously, that's exactly what Felisin was at Skullcup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 What would you call it? She sleeps with Beneth, Beneth's friends, anyone Beneth wantsher to sleep with, anyoen she thinks will ebenfit Beneth, all the guards-not just the men- on the ship, even BAUDIN Well, I would call it trying to survive in a hopeless situation. And what reason exactly had she to trust Baudin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Saving her life and protecting her a few times? Also, Felisin achieved almost literally nothing with Beneth if we're to believe Baudin and Heboric. Felisin got self righteous when they got mad and enters into a total state of dependence on Beneth that devolves into endless whining long after the bastard gets what he deserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Saving her life and protecting her a few times? Also, Felisin achieved almost literally nothing with Beneth if we're to believe Baudin and Heboric. Felisin got self righteous when they got mad and enters into a total state of dependence on Beneth that devolves into endless whining long after the bastard gets what he deserved. Typical victim behavior (you know Stockholm syndrome etc.) From Felisin's point of view there was nothing Baudin could give her (and he really should have told her the truth from the beginning, regardless what she could have thought about it). And no, I don't believe Baudin and Heboric any more than I believe Felisin herself. They are not disinterested witnesses. Felisin is very realistic and well-drawn character and probably my favorite in the whole series but YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 The stockholm syndrome is almost forgiveable if Erikson doesn't subject us to her endless whining for chapter after chapter. She's irritating And I certainly believe Heboric about how he and Baudin got food. Beneth was just that much of a bastard. And Baudin did most everything he could short of physically restraining Felisin. Granted he wasn't perfect, but her constant attempts to kill him were so bratty and childish I lose any pity. And I noticed Felisin seemed to have allowed herself to be a victim. If she thought Baudin, who was more than capable of taking Beneth, fighting the mob as he did at the start, couldn't do anything for her, not too bright a girl. And for the record: Keep anything personal out of this: I'm perfectly allowed to judge a fictional character by a different standard than I would in real life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eurytus Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Felisin, the town bicycle? She's a strong character? More than half of the time, she sat back and whined about Beneth. No arguments on the others, though. A strongly written character is not the same as being a character who is strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightsnake Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 I don't think Erikson even writes the vast majority of the characters strongly, so not an issue. If he set out to make her story in DHG a pain to read, he's certainly to be congratulated. The Chain of Dogs was the only thing that kept me reading the Malazan series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseFool Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 uh... I'm kind of showing up after the battle (the answer was given from page 1, notably with a perfect reply by Dagger), but to answer your question BitterSteel, here's my 2 cents worth. In short, yes the writing does improve. I had the same difficulty as you at the beginning. I'm a character-driven more than a plot-driven reader and I pay a lot of attention to the style. Regarding characters, IMHO Erikson is definitely no Stephen Donaldson and as for prose he's no Guy Gavriel Kay either... As was mentionned his strong points are worldbuilding (he's the best bar none) and plot (and you're really awed when you realise about the sheer size of his vision) Now, that being said, and to get back to your question, Deadhouse Gates is better written than GOTM but you'll feel a big improvement in Memories of Ice really (what kept me reading was DG's end, which is my favourite moment in the whole series). If you still are struggling after book 3, I think you can give up. Tastes, cup of tea, all that ... For what it's worth, I'm like Dagger, a Malazan addict, and think Erikson and Martin write the 2 best ongoing fantasy series right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.