Malazan

[End of Disc One]

I don't know why I even click on these Erikson threads anymore. It's clear that people here want to hate Erikson and will twist his words in any way to make him look more like an ass.

I encourage everyone to actually read that introduction to GotM.

[Blaine]

I don't know why I even click on these Erikson threads anymore. It's clear that people here want to hate Erikson and will twist his words in any way to make him look more like an ass.

Sadly, you don't have to twist anything. At least, I haven't. Feel free to point out anything I may have "twisted."

But for the record, I don't hate the guy. I just don't like his fiction. Nor, for that matter, his reasons why he thinks people don't like his fiction.

[Eurytus]

I don't know why I even click on these Erikson threads anymore. It's clear that people here want to hate Erikson and will twist his words in any way to make him look more like an ass.

I encourage everyone to actually read that introduction to GotM.

Actually its people like you, who label people who disagree with them, as "haters" who are doing the twisting. Its a tired and disingenous debating tactic which you use because you can't be bothered to actually rebut people's opinions. You merely wish to devalue themselves as able to offer an informed opinion in the first place.

[Gormenghast]

Sorry Gormenghast, but I honestly read that piece and I thought the guy sounded like an ass. I apologize if that wasn't the discussion you wanted to have, but life is like that. ;)

You probably read my quote, but I doubt you ever clicked on the second link. As I said the reason why I brought up the thread was rather specific.

That second article has absolutely NOTHING to share with discussions of popularity, if not tangentially.

Erikson actually uses Cormac McCarthy as an inspiration for his own writing.

[Zach H]

I'm honestly not seeing where Erikson is being unfair or a jerk or whatever in his comments, especially when he says things like:

A virtue or a flaw in my writing? Maybe both. You see, I already know that world, but the only details I show you are the important ones. There's no filler. And that's not fair.

So, to all you new readers on this, I am ever amazed and slightly astonished to find you staying with me.

Sounds like a guy who recognizes that a] there are readers who view his writing as flawed and that b] it is a pleasant surprise that others have "bought in" to his method and stuck with the series.

Is it wrong for writers to come across as confident in their work, because honestly that's all I see here.

[Old Nan]

It's a tried-and-true rhetorical tactic. Am I right or am I wrong? As humble as it makes me sound to say so, maybe a little of both, but most importantly I'm right.

When I see a thread about an author or series I don't care for, I simply don't click on it. I don't know why people on this board put so much energy into bashing books they don't like.

Refusing to debate an opponent's stance is to concede the truth of that stance; silence is affirmation. So, since this part of the discussion was kicked off by Gormenghast, it's only natural that the people who dislike MBOTF will respond.

[David Selig]

I see nothing wrong with Erikson's attitude in the article from Gormenghast's link and in the new foreword of GOTM. He is ambitious and wanted to write the series on his own terms and he didn't make compromises. Even if you consider it a failure, at least it is an ambitious failure, not settling for mediocrity.

I don't think he's saying or implying that whoever doesn't like his books is stupid or anything like that. He simply states that his books demand more concentration and effort than the typical epic fantasy, which is undeniable.

[End of Disc One]

Actually its people like you, who label people who disagree with them, as "haters" who are doing the twisting. Its a tired and disingenous debating tactic which you use because you can't be bothered to actually rebut people's opinions. You merely wish to devalue themselves as able to offer an informed opinion in the first place.

It's actually my attempt not to engage in debate, since arguing on the internet is something I've made a conscious effort to cut back on these last few years. It's not my intent to be tiresome, it's just my wish that everyone would lighten up.

[Xereaux]

The thread was basically closed and exhausted.

That does sometimes happen when your argument is "You're stupid.".

[kungtotte]

That does sometimes happen when your argument is "You're stupid.".

I know you are but what am I?

[Antonius Pius]

I know you are but what am I?

Swedish?

[kungtotte]

And don't you forget it, sonny!

[Horza]

At last the tone of this thread picks up!

[delete this account pls]

You know what else picks up? Your mum.

[Antonius Pius]

You know what else picks up? Your mum.

Oooh, them's fighting words!

[Guy Kilmore]

I give up.

Don't worry, I don't think he has finished the series yet, so this is probably the best way to handle the situation.

Antonious

Oooh, them's fighting words!

Fight, Fight, Fight!

[Blaine]

It's actually my attempt not to engage in debate, since arguing on the internet is something I've made a conscious effort to cut back on these last few years. It's not my intent to be tiresome, it's just my wish that everyone would lighten up.

Your attempt to "not engage in debate" is to chime in and call anyone who disagrees with Erikson a "hater who twists his words?"

You are astoundingly bad at telling people to lighten up.

He simply states that his books demand more concentration and effort than the typical epic fantasy, which is undeniable.

Really? I think it's plenty deniable.

If I consider the sheer number of characters and plot threads in Jordan's books or Martin's books or even some of the concepts that Bakker or Mieville or any number of writers is presenting - it doesn't seem to me at all that Erikson's books require an any more concentration and effort from readers.

If anything, the assumption that your own work is so challenging compared to your peers is exactly the sort of self-affirming assery by Erikson that I'm pointing out here.

Now, if you said his prose and character was so bland and his setting and deus ex machina so ridiculous that it required more concentration and effort to ignore, you might be on to something.

[MinDonner]

I don't even know why either side is trying to convince the other. Some people read it and liked it, some people read it and didn't. No amount of board posts is going to change that. At least argue about the damn content or something; all this "it's great!" "no, it's shit!" "no, you're shit!" is just a little embarrassing. :dunno:

[The Evil Hat]

I don't even know why either side is trying to convince the other. Some people read it and liked it, some people read it and didn't. No amount of board posts is going to change that. At least argue about the damn content or something; all this "it's great!" "no, it's shit!" "no, you're shit!" is just a little embarrassing. :dunno:

No, you're embarrassing! We're trying to have a serious name-calling, here!

Anyway, I'll just say that I enjoy the books, but totally lack the energy for another multi thread repetition of the same three points.

[Errant Bard]

YOUR MOM is embarassing :fencing:

all this "it's great!" "no, it's shit!" "no, you're shit!" is just a little embarrassing. :dunno:

You obviously are confused by the depth and complexity of this thread's themes, you see, we already know the arguments, so the only details we show you are the important ones. There's no filler. And that's not fair.