Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Just finished it. Not a deep read but an interesting concept. I felt like Scalzi was obsessed with his own cleverness and wasn't really into the story. I'll read the next book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterKing Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Agreed, very interesting idea behind it, could have been better executed/written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.T. Phipps Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Its on my wish list. What's right and wrong with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 The concept of a multi-solar empire dependent upon a natural phenomenon over which the empire has no control... cool. The rather twee and shallow characters with little depth and who seemed to lack any fear of the broader implications of the scale of the problem they were confronting. Not so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banjax451 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Can I ask a question of those who've read it? My big complaint recently with Scalzi is that the main characters all seem the same - the standard snarky protagonist that seems to go across all his books. The differences between John Perry/Harry Wilson (Old Man's War series), Harry Creek (Android's Dream), Chris Shane (Lock-in), Jack Holloway (Fuzzy Nation), Andrew Dahl (Redshirts), not to mention other minor characters are all relatively minor and deal more with setting - the personality is the same [yes - I looked up all the names]. I'm not "complaining" - but it is something that's gotten more and more on my nerves as he's written. It's become so prevalent to me that I often immediately notice when they're not present (for my money, the three after-sections in Redshirts were the best parts of the book in large part because Scalzi abandoned that voice entirely). Is Redshirts more of the same? Snarky protagonist who is snarky just for snark's sake? Or is this more of a departure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 3 hours ago, banjax451 said: Can I ask a question of those who've read it? My big complaint recently with Scalzi is that the main characters all seem the same - the standard snarky protagonist that seems to go across all his books. The differences between John Perry/Harry Wilson (Old Man's War series), Harry Creek (Android's Dream), Chris Shane (Lock-in), Jack Holloway (Fuzzy Nation), Andrew Dahl (Redshirts), not to mention other minor characters are all relatively minor and deal more with setting - the personality is the same [yes - I looked up all the names]. I'm not "complaining" - but it is something that's gotten more and more on my nerves as he's written. It's become so prevalent to me that I often immediately notice when they're not present (for my money, the three after-sections in Redshirts were the best parts of the book in large part because Scalzi abandoned that voice entirely). Is Redshirts more of the same? Snarky protagonist who is snarky just for snark's sake? Or is this more of a departure? Snark, snark, and more snark. There is no sense of weight to anything that's going on. Everyone is making light of the potential end of existing human civilization. The scope of the story he's trying to tell and the manner he is telling it just don't gel. There is so much humor injected into the story that it really seems like the characters don't give a shit about the people who are likely going to die. Humor is great but it is overdone in this story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banjax451 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Snark, snark, and more snark. There is no sense of weight to anything that's going on. Everyone is making light of the potential end of existing human civilization. The scope of the story he's trying to tell and the manner he is telling it just don't gel. There is so much humor injected into the story that it really seems like the characters don't give a shit about the people who are likely going to die. Humor is great but it is overdone in this story. Ah...such was my fear. I think Scalzi can write...but I do wish he'd cut back on the humor and write straight/serious. Alas...it's become his crutch. Frustrating, since I think his worldbuilding can be pretty good and it seemed like an interesting concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 3 minutes ago, banjax451 said: Ah...such was my fear. I think Scalzi can write...but I do wish he'd cut back on the humor and write straight/serious. Alas...it's become his crutch. Frustrating, since I think his worldbuilding can be pretty good and it seemed like an interesting concept. My favorite part of the Redshirts were the three codas. They were quite good, he dropped the snark in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Never read any Scalzi outside of his blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 1, 2017 Author Share Posted May 1, 2017 I actually liked The Last Colony. It had some snark but not as much as I perceive in this book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frodostark Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 23 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I felt like Scalzi was obsessed with his own cleverness and wasn't really into the story. My impression is that this applies to most everything he's written... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banjax451 Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 17 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: My favorite part of the Redshirts were the three codas. They were quite good, he dropped the snark in them. And yet, I get the feeling from how defensive he is of them...many of his fans (perhaps the majority) absolutely hated them or were at best ambivalent. Which is a shame, since I continue to believe they are the best things he's written. I'm not opposed to a little snark now and then...but snark for snark's sake is just annoying. Humor in fiction is important. But story and character have to be first...the humor can't come at their expense. I ended up talking about this with my wife last night. There are plenty of authors that we both like that have crutches. I love Alan Furst, for example, but the man has spent the last decade writing the same book every two years. The quality of Furst's prose keeps me coming back. Scalzi's prose isn't great enough for me to continue to read the same thing over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 I've just updated the title to this thread. Are there people who really like to read Speculative Fiction that is primarily snark? I like some snark as much as the next person but books that are snark, more snark, and nothing but snark... are really not my cup of tea. I hadn't thought of the way Scalzi writes as Snarky but yeah... that's pretty much dead on. He is capable of pretty decent stories and prose but the over load of snark just gets tiresome after a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hello World Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Why don't you fix the title? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, Hello World said: Why don't you fix the title? What do I have there in error? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hello World Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Is it actually called Collaping Empire? Never heard of it but google says Collapsing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Hello World said: Is it actually called Collaping Empire? Never heard of it but google says Collapsing. Typos strike back. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Is there enough Snark fiction to justify a sub genre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said: Is there enough Snark fiction to justify a sub genre? Good question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leofric Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 38 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Typos strike back. Sorry. Third time's the charm *cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.