Pat Rothfuss XVIII: Whereof one cannot speak...

[IlyaP]

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

Patrick Rothfuss Is Hosting a Twitch Series (With Guest Authors!) to Promote Latest Publication

https://www.tor.com/2023/09/06/patrick-rothfuss-twitch-series-narrow-road/

 

That is one hell of a stacked crew of guests. 

[AncalagonTheBlack]

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

Patrick Rothfuss Is Hosting a Twitch Series (With Guest Authors!) to Promote Latest Publication

https://www.tor.com/2023/09/06/patrick-rothfuss-twitch-series-narrow-road/

 

"This post is closed for comments."

[Gaston de Foix]

10 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

He might have an obligation to repay an advance on the third book if never delivered but… no… he has no absolute legal obligation to ever write another word.

@IlyaP, is that how publishing contracts are drafted? I would have assumed that the contract provided for the delivery of three books with separate advances for each.  I would also have assumed that it contained a termination or cancellation or non-delivery provision that directed for the repayment of the advance upon non-delivery upon a specified date. 

To have a provision for unwinding a contractual obligation is different from not having it in the first place.  

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

@IlyaP, is that how publishing contracts are drafted? I would have assumed that the contract provided for the delivery of three books with separate advances for each.  I would also have assumed that it contained a termination or cancellation or non-delivery provision that directed for the repayment of the advance upon non-delivery upon a specified date. 

To have a provision for unwinding a contractual obligation is different from not having it in the first place.  

I stand by my statement.  That there are consequences if he chooses not to write doesn’t change the fact that he has no obligation to continue writing.

Edited September 7, 2023 by Ser Scot A Ellison
Stupid spelling mistake

[Poobah]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That their are consequences if he chooses not to write doesn’t change the fact that he has no obligation to continue writing.

Out of interest how then do you define an obligation? If a written out spoken agreement to do something doesn't constitute one what does? I don't want to get too lost in semantics but to me these things fall quite well within the definitely of obligation being a legal or moral imperative to do a thing and I'm curious to see where our views diverge and why, is it just this specific example? 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, Poobah said:

Out of interest how then do you define an obligation? If a written out spoken agreement to do something doesn't constitute one what does? I don't want to get too lost in semantics but to me these things fall quite well within the definitely of obligation being a legal or moral imperative to do a thing and I'm curious to see where our views diverge and why, is it just this specific example? 

It is an agreement to do x and if x is not completed consequence y follows.  Now, this agreement is absolutely not with the book buying public so no “obligation” exists between the author and their readers.  This obligation is between the author and the publisher.

Rothfuss’s lies are still awful.

[baxus]

19 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I stand by my statement.  That their there are consequences if he chooses not to write doesn’t change the fact that he has no obligation to continue writing.

Fixed that for you  

Petty grammar nazi outburst aside, I do agree with you that there's obviously no legal obligation from author's (whether it's Rothfuss, GRRM or whoever) side to provide us with completed series.

That being said, there's a difference between GRRM writing his ASoIaF series for close to 30 years now and not being finished and Rothfuss saying "it's done, part 2 will be published a year after part 1 and part 3 a year after that" and then letting it get to the point where you publish 10 year anniversary edition of book 2 (which was published 4 years after book 1, btw) before you have even the vaguest idea when part 3 can be expected.

Now, I'm not saying what he said was legally binding, but the gap between what he said (and how he said it) and what he failed to deliver (and how he failed to deliver) is enough for people to see him as an asshole.

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

I may be wrong but didn’t GRRM originally promise to hopefully deliver ADWD one year after publishing AFFC, claiming that it’s almost ready  ? My point is authors can get it wrong, unintentionally…

Edited September 7, 2023 by Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II

[Ser Not Appearing]

18 hours ago, Lord Patrek said:

... book 3 as it existed in that interview way back when (with Yours Truly, by the way) is no longer relevant.

Always interesting to see who is who irl on here. Some of you might even know what you're talking about. I, on the other hand, am an accountant of no regard and my opinions hold no water to anyone but me.

Do you have a link to the old interview?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

I may be wrong but didn’t GRRM originally promise to hopefully deliver ADWD one year after publishing AFFC, claiming that it’s almost ready  ? My point is authors can get it wrong, unintentionally…

GRRM never made a specific promise. He only expressed a hope.

[Lord Patrek]

Here's the link: https://fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com/2007/03/patrick-rothfuss-interview.html

As far as GRRM is concerned, he technically had nearly half a book ready to go when they split AFfC in two. Trouble is, he scrapped huge portions of the manuscript and started over, which explains why it took so long to finally complete ADWD. His editor told me when I met up with her in NYC a few years before ADWD was published.

[Ser Not Appearing]

I think GRRM also saw that his commenting on progress was setting expectations that led to disappointment and so stopped updating ... which is probably as good thing because his estimates were always proving to be wildly optimistic ... whereas Pat seems not to give updates because f*ck you, that's why. And GRRM, though not a focus I entirely appreciate, remains engaged and productive with his universe overall. He's still creating in the ASOIaF world.

Different beasts, really.

[baxus]

1 hour ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

I may be wrong but didn’t GRRM originally promise to hopefully deliver ADWD one year after publishing AFFC, claiming that it’s almost ready  ? My point is authors can get it wrong, unintentionally…

Sure, authors can get it wrong, unintentionally...

But what did Rothfuss actually get wrong unintentionally? He very intentionally built his "brand" by taking shots at authors taking long to finish their series, explicitly saying things like "this trilogy is finished, you'll get the books one year apart", "there's no such thing as writer's block" etc.

Fast forward to today, 16 years since NotW was first published, and the past decade was mostly filled with Rothfuss throwing tantrums whenever asked about progress on book 3 and making false promises in return for donations to his charity.

P.S. GRRM was getting a lot more shit for taking his time with A Dance with Dragons than Rothfuss is getting and was nowhere near as big of an asshole in communication with his fans.

[Jaxom 1974]

11 hours ago, IlyaP said:

That is one hell of a stacked crew of guests. 

Will the "To be announced special guest" for the release just be a Twitch of Rothfuss interviewing himself?

[Lord Patrek]

I may be wrong, and if so I'm sure you guys will provide links and stuff, but other than in our interview, I don't believe I've ever seen Rothfuss claim that the trilogy was finished, that we'd get the books a year apart, yada yada yada.

He soon realized that it wouldn't be the case when he started working on TWMF, so I doubt that such claims were widespread.

He's been acting like a jerk since, yes. But taking shots at others with such claims, I'd like to see that beyond our interview.

[Gaston de Foix]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

It is an agreement to do x and if x is not completed consequence y follows.  Now, this agreement is absolutely not with the book buying public so no “obligation” exists between the author and their readers.  This obligation is between the author and the publisher.

This is fair.  I just don't think it's accurate to say there's no legal or moral obligation.  

As I said earlier in this thread it is a more contentious claim to say that fans are the real parties in interest [and the publishers are middlemen] or that fans are in some sense third-party beneficiaries of the contract. 

I'm not interested so much in whether it is a legally tenable claim (probably not, actually), as whether it reflects our moral intuitions.  Certainly mine, but certainly not yours.  

[Larry of the Lawn]

At least Rothfuss is no Stanek.  

[Myrddin]

12 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

At least Rothfuss is no Stanek.  

Dude. Don't cast that summon spell!

[AncalagonTheBlack]

23 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

At least Rothfuss is no Stanek.  

Is that guy still writing? 

[Werthead]

7 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

@IlyaP, is that how publishing contracts are drafted? I would have assumed that the contract provided for the delivery of three books with separate advances for each.  I would also have assumed that it contained a termination or cancellation or non-delivery provision that directed for the repayment of the advance upon non-delivery upon a specified date. 

To have a provision for unwinding a contractual obligation is different from not having it in the first place.  

The first two books have outsold all of DAW's best-case, most optimistic sales projections probably a thousand times over. DAW have made absurd money from Rothfuss, and the books continue to sell very well on backlist (even if I'm sure diminishing returns are kicking in). I would not be surprised at all if the books continued to outsell most new books quite handsomely.

Rothfuss is a cash cow, so whilst DAW might be annoyed at his schedule and lack of communication (which seeped out with Betsy's angry Facebook post a few years ago), the idea they might sue him or drop him is pretty implausible. The same with Martin and Lynch's publishers.