Shoved Down Your Throat

[Cantabile]

False dichotomy. It's possible to not notice prose not because it's dull and normal, but because it fits perfectly with the storytelling so that you're not constantly being pulled out of the story to notice the author. Also, it's possible to notice the prose all the time and NOT find it striking or captivating. I don't find Bakker's prose captivating.

What do you mean by prose fitting with storytelling?

Bakker's prose is highly different across his works; Disciple of the Dog, Neuropath, and Prince of Nothing all employ very different styles as a reflection of their material, so I'm not sure why you would believe you're noticing the author through the prose. As for whether or not it's captivating, that's all in the cup of tea, so I won't bother arguing about that :P

But I get the rather obnoxious feeling from you that you will instantly dismiss any criticism against your favorite author by implying that the flaw must lie with those who don't like his writing. ETA: Also I feel that you ascribe to me a position that I never had by replying as if I said that all viewpoints should be written the same. I SAID that Bakker's style change is too drastic for me, not that I thought that the shift between first and third person shouldn't be different at all.

I did not intend for my reply to come across that way, and that's now how I interpreted what you said, so my apologies. However, the style is a direct result of the shift between first and third person. Different viewpoints should utilize different styles as a reflection of said view point. Since there is a giant gap between the two narrators, why wouldn't the style demonstrate that disparity?

If you were talking about battle scenes as told through a third person viewpoint contrasting to the rest of that viewpoint's prose, then I'd understand, but these are two entirely different narrators in this case. It's like saying that there's too much of a contrast between Jesus Christ's viewpoint, and Buddha's. Well, of course there is, they're two different people. If they come across the same then the author's screwed up.

[Old Nan]

I have absolutely no desire to read Bakker's non-PON books precisely because I'm afraid of having his views 'shoved down my throat', but his prose is definitely the main reason he's my favorite contemporary fantasy author. And I guess this has turned into a Bakker thread, but that's what you get for transparently quoting opinions about Bakker as the basis for the original post.

[Cantabile]

I have absolutely no desire to read Bakker's non-PON books precisely because I'm afraid of having his views 'shoved down my throat', but his prose is definitely the main reason he's my favorite contemporary fantasy author. And I guess this has turned into a Bakker thread, but that's what you get for transparently quoting opinions about Bakker as the basis for the original post.

Disciple of the Dog, is pretty lacking on views; all observations about life are simply pieces of characterization for the protagonist. Neuropath, certainly holds many views, as they were the basis for the novel. I'd say it's probably the most "preachy" of his works.

And I agree with you complete; his prose is exactly why he is my favorite author in the genre. Other authors may be more gifted at characterization, worldbuilding, pacing, and storytelling, but no one comes close in terms of poetical style.

[Galactus]

It's my view that literature, as an art form, should be exploring every means of expression and evocation possibly through written language.

Why? I mean, I can see the value of experimenting to see what works. And your relativism is kindof true in a sense, but the point remains that I don't think Bakker's prose is anything special: He's occasionally giggle-worthy, often stilted and has awesome battle and magic descriptions. This makes him come up about even in my book. *shrugs*

You can feel free to think Bakker is the bee's knees o course: It's your prerogative as a reader I simply stated that I don't think Bakker is a particularly good prosaist. You might like him, good for you.

. It's not a fault of the author if the reader is using strict logic to decipher the prose, but of the reader.

Now that's how you make a value-judgement: State that anyone who disagrees with you are too stupid to get it. Bakker does that a lot too (one of the reasons I like his books a lot more than the author)

For the record, I don't hate Bakker's book (I find the man incredibly grating, but that's a different matter). I consider his books pretty good (but with some noticeable flaws) roughly in the same way as Jordan (which is also a series I like but with some serious flaws, although the flaws are very different) they're both fine works in their own way (although Bakker's is obviously way more intelligent and structured)

I just don't see how Bakker's prose in general is anyhing special. It's occasionally exceptional, it's often stilted, sometimes giggle-worthy and other times it just is. Overall I ouldn't rate his prose as either good OR bad.

But he has both good and bad parts of his prose.

[Cantabile]

Why? I mean, I can see the value of experimenting to see what works. And your relativism is kindof true in a sense, but the point remains that I don't think Bakker's prose is anything special: He's occasionally giggle-worthy, often stilted and has awesome battle and magic descriptions. This makes him come up about even in my book. *shrugs*

But why do you find it giggle-worthy? You haven't really offered any explanation other than it being "fake" and "stylized" while not explaining what qualities possibly makes prose fake.

As for the why of experimentation, that will depend on the tastes of the individual reader, but as history has shown ceaselessly society is constantly looking for innovation, even if it takes time for our aesthetic senses to adapt to new styles. There is no art form that has not undergone evolution over the centuries. Art is, after all, an aspect of culture, and culture is in perpetual metamorphosis.

If one prefers the contemporary conventions, that's perfectly fine, but others will always be thirsting for new developments. Without exploration, how can discovery exist?

Now that's how you make a value-judgement: State that anyone who disagrees with you are too stupid to get it. Bakker does that a lot too (one of the reasons I like his books a lot more than the author)

I'm not calling anyone stupid, I'm just stating that there are many techniques for prose, and each requires a different means of interpretation. If a reader is reading prose of the Symbolist movement, for example, literally, then they're simply not doing it correctly. To use Mallarmé for my point again, one simply cannot read his poetry as one would the works of Frost. Completely different styles of prose, meant to accomplish different things.

It's like the difference between denotation and connotation. If one is only using one to interpret literature, then they're effectively wearing a blindfold over one eye.

[Grack21]

By again do you mean you tried The Prince of Nothing but didn't enjoy it?

No, I've meant to pick it up a few times but one of my friends always warns me away from it, because of the, let's say, perceived misogyny/that guy like rape to much. But some of these friends have said the same things about other books that I don't consider to be like that at ALL, plus some of Bakkers interviews have left me with the view that its supposed to be horrible, which is something certain metal bands I listen to do sometimes, so I can get behind that. Heck, I need to read at and just form my own damn opinion. Of course the problem now is I have over 200+ books to read, so if I got the first one RIGHT NOW, I don't know if I'd get to it this year. I tell you , ever since I stopped buying anime dvds, my book collection has swelled to enormous proportions. And now I'm ranting.

So, back to topc, someone mentioned Under the Dome. I like King usually, heck I even kinda agree with what hes saying in that, but HOLY CRAP. He's not just shoving it down your throat, hes beating you over the head, spraying it in your face, and sneaking it into your coffee!

[The Anti-Targ]

Yeah, I don't like preachy fiction, even when the author's PoV is one I agree with. Too easy to make straw man arguments that no one really gets to debate. Fiction that's intended to get people to question their ideas / ideologies is fine by me though.

[Cantabile]

No, I've meant to pick it up a few times but one of my friends always warns me away from it, because of the, let's say, perceived misogyny/that guy like rape to much. But some of these friends have said the same things about other books that I don't consider to be like that at ALL, plus some of Bakkers interviews have left me with the view that its supposed to be horrible, which is something certain metal bands I listen to do sometimes, so I can get behind that. Heck, I need to read at and just form my own damn opinion. Of course the problem now is I have over 200+ books to read, so if I got the first one RIGHT NOW, I don't know if I'd get to it this year. I tell you , ever since I stopped buying anime dvds, my book collection has swelled to enormous proportions. And now I'm ranting.

It's certainly something that's best to form your own opinion about. Besides, nothing wrong with portraying misogyny and all the other nasty social realities in fiction. If Bakker were actually advocating for misogyny then I myself would be turned off by his works, but it's nothing but portrayals.

Don't feel too bad about your giant book collection, my sheet music collection is currently living in the garage because my wife couldn't handle it consuming our house anymore :P

[Eponine]

As for the why of experimentation, that will depend on the tastes of the individual reader, but as history has shown ceaselessly society is constantly looking for innovation, even if it takes time for our aesthetic senses to adapt to new styles. There is no art form that has not undergone evolution over the centuries. Art is, after all, an aspect of culture, and culture is in perpetual metamorphosis.

And you think Bakker represents literary innovation? Or a new style that our aesthetic senses need time to adapt to? SRSY? Can you point out exactly what in his books cause you to think this? It's obviously not the plot structure. He has a larger-than-average vocabulary, but I think that we can agree that passages like this are fairly representative:

Each word both struck Serwe like a fist and passed right through her, leaving her untouched. She saw Barastas's wife marching toward their train of horses, her hands sweeping in deranged gestures. The Scylvendi yanked his mount about, bulled his bow from its case. He nocked and loosed an arrow in one effortless motion.

or

Despite the destruction, one Scarlet Schoolman, then another, and then another still, plunged to the rooftops below, struck into salt by heathen Chorae. His eye drawn by a blinding flash, Kellhus saw one sorcerer crash into the hillside, where he broke and tumbled like a thing of stone.

And of course there are passages that are better written, more evocative, but not to the point of being stylistically different than anything else out there.

So what about Bakker makes him stylistically unique? And what other books have you read that you consider stylistically innovative.

[aimlessgun]

In this thread: people arguing about Bakker's prose but too lazy to search through the book for quotes :D

Which is probably fine if the argument is just over taste. So far my 'taste' impression of Bakker is that it has some good, some bad, and mostly alright. Maybe I don't know enough about literature but I wasn't sure what was innovative.

Plot dragging is what occures when an underlying theme emerges as the central focus instead of the story action. When themes energe, they should only break the surface of the water like a fish's fin, and only for a moment, or glide by majesticly in the distance like an iceberg out on the open sea.

Haha I like this imagery.

[Korr]

Just to put in my two bits, I can show you what (to me) is the very definition of an author's message shoved down your throat, thanks to the ever-astonishing Baen Free Library. Behold.

http://www.webscription.net/10.1125/Baen/067172052X/067172052X.htm

Damn those dirty green feminists, always ruining everything for the noble geek-male race. If only they'd let us burn more logs!(?!?)

Regards,

Ryan

[Crazydog7]

That's my point I think. Ender's Game has a message (several ones, arguably) but it never makes me stop up and go "STOP: PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: SOCIALISTS ARE EVIL." Or anything.

At least it didn't when I read it last time, might be more grating the next time around.

The message I got from Ender's Game is that adults are so damn stupid they have to have children fight a war that they started and they compound their idiocy by allowing international politics be dictated by the siblings of one of those children.

The only serise I have read recently and felt that a message was rammed down my throat were throat were those novels of "the change" by SM Stirling.

[Grack21]

It's certainly something that's best to form your own opinion about. Besides, nothing wrong with portraying misogyny and all the other nasty social realities in fiction. If Bakker were actually advocating for misogyny then I myself would be turned off by his works, but it's nothing but portrayals.

Don't feel too bad about your giant book collection, my sheet music collection is currently living in the garage because my wife couldn't handle it consuming our house anymore :P

Right, knowing that hes advocating the opposite of what hes writing helps a lot. I wish i had a camera when I told some of my friends that Goodkind was ACTUALLY SERIOUS about what he writes. Some of them didn't believe me at first. I have one friend who refuse to believe that SoT isn't parody.

I don't feel bad abuot my book collection, its just weird to have books on my self I haven't read that i bought four to five years ago. :)

[Curethan]

And you think Bakker represents literary innovation? Or a new style that our aesthetic senses need time to adapt to? SRSY? Can you point out exactly what in his books cause you to think this?

So what about Bakker makes him stylistically unique?

You're asking for evidence? I think the amount of discussion and debate that goes on about Bakker justifies these facts. It has formented a lot of persistent debate about the various themes and reactions to them across various boards. The critical element within genre circles all discuss this aspect of the books at each release. It really comes down to opinion though and that can only be argued, not proven. For me, the amount of introversive navel gazing and desire to discuss and anylize that PoN caused in me is easily equal to what I have recieved from more readily acceptable 'heavy literature'.

[Galactus]

You're asking for evidence? I think the amount of discussion and debate that goes on about Bakker justifies these facts. It has formented a lot of persistent debate about the various themes and reactions to them across various boards. The critical element within genre circles all discuss this aspect of the books at each release. It really comes down to opinion though and that can only be argued, not proven. For me, the amount of introversive navel gazing and desire to discuss and anylize that PoN caused in me is easily equal to what I have recieved from more readily acceptable 'heavy literature'.

We're talking prose.

[Datepalm]

Just to put in my two bits, I can show you what (to me) is the very definition of an author's message shoved down your throat, thanks to the ever-astonishing Baen Free Library. Behold.

http://www.webscript.../067172052X.htm

Damn those dirty green feminists, always ruining everything for the noble geek-male race. If only they'd let us burn more logs!(?!?)

I've read that book, and I actually enjoyed it. (despite being a dirty green feminist.) Oh sure, politically it was nonsense, though I'm not sure the politics weren't actually satire half the time, (I don't know what Niven and Pournells politics are usually) but the thing was fun, (and it was ultimately a glorification of community spirit, so...)

[Datepalm]

So...does social imperative mean socialist imperative? I took it as meaning ones duty vis a vis one's place in society. That would still be a little ironic, but not a total non sequitor.

From what I know about libertarianism (ie, arguing with Tormund and I remember reading the Fountainhead, but it seems to have left my brain entirely), it would seem to decry, or even assume to not exist, any such thing as a duty vis ones place in society. The whole point is that you don't need society, or that anything beyond your frontier farmstead is oppressive, or something, right?

So, to keep this on topic, books I think of as being very social tend to very strongly emphasize that ...(fuck, i'm trying not to say 'dialectic' here)...feedback loop between the way individuals are shaped by society but also shape it in turn, and acknowledge that that can be a mechanism of opression, but also where the good stuff about being, well, human lies. (Martin, very much. Pratchett too. But its not really one of Meivilles major themes, with the exception of the City and the City.)

[Old Nan]

We're talking prose.

Actually, I agree with you. I think Bakker's prose is usually beautiful and certainly exceptional within the genre for its quality, but I don't see how it's innovative.

[Lyanna Stark]

Aaah playing total catch up with this subject. :)

In the genre, his prose is exceptional. While that might not be saying much overall, Bakker is certainly in the top 5%. In fact, I have a hard time thinking of any in fantasy in particular who can compare. (I'm not versed in SF to make such a claim).

No, he isn't.

If you want really good prose try Mieville, LeGuin or Guy Gavriel Kay. I think GRRM has a very deft touch when he writes as well which appeals to me a lot. Another fantastic work is "The Never Ending Story" by Michael Ende (sure it's YA but it's AMAZING) and also Beagle's "The Unicorn".

Sure, Bakker is no plodding, braid tugging Jordan, nor is he the chicken of all evil-Goodkind, but when it comes to those who are the finest in the genre, I wouldn't say he is in the top 5%. Certainly in the top 50% though, absolutely.

There has to be lots more since I don't even consider myself very well read in the SF/F genre.

Now can we please drop the Bakker defence mode here for the thread in general? Serisouly people, the guy ain't that interesting. :P

Errant Bard:

On pretentiousness and showing stuff down your throat: some people said Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex was pretentious and tiresome. Maybe Goodkind will actually find more recognition in the future, too.

Oh good grief. :lol:

[Lyanna Stark]

Mieville fans (of which I am one), do you feel that the end of Iron Council was at all a cop out? I think that it was good in the context of the story - it was almost necessary to bring Judah's setup to a resolution. (And IMO it demonstrates that Mieville does not think of cool bereted commies in smoky cafes as the heart of the revolution). But like Lyanna said, he stops short of showing any real success. This could be a sign that he's nuanced and not pushing the propaganda in his novels that following his political stance will automatically have a positive outcome. But where I think that Mieville kind of falls short is how he fails to show how socialism works at any stage except as "underground unionist resistance" (as Datepalm said). I don't mean how the philosophical/political theory of socialism works, but how it works through characters and their plot-relevant actions. Even in Iron Council, most of the time it seems more like an oligarchy (although of course, he addresses this through Judah), and the entire decision making process seems to be Judah and Ann Hari although he give lip service to a collective process.

This is something that really interests me too. I thought the ending to Iron Council works really well. At the time, I think In was of two minds about it, but the more I let the novel sink in, the better it fits. China himself apparently sees it more as revolution as a myth and inspiration, and a bit of a "socialist dream", i.e. you can have your revolution, but also constantly expect it, in a slighly messianic fashion (and yes I lifted that from an essay, but it really is the truth: there is something strangely messiah like about the Iron Council always approaching New Crobuzon).

He also seems pretty adamant that he doesn't want to push his political ideas down people's throats, which is probably one of the reasons there hasn't been a successful revolution anywhere in Mieville-land. :)

Regarding characters and socialism, I think he shows in the Council and Ann-Hari that socialism won't solve all ills, it creates something new, something different where the possibilities are different, but you will always have people infighting, being total dicks, some people will be more prominent, factions will evolve, things will be poorly organised, etc.

Socialism is not waving a magic wand, but it gives people a different purpose? value? chance? maybe all of those. It transforms people into something else. Not something perfect though. But people were working doing the same tasks, but for their own sake during the Iron Council, and that to most people makes a huge difference. You can stand tall and proud.

This is also why Ann-Hari gets so oncredibly upset with Judah at the end. He takes the decision out of their own hands and completely removes their freedom of choice, their decision making process and everything they have fought for. Of course, we as readers can see why he did it and that it is the "right" decision, but also an incredibly "wrong" decision since it goes against everything the Council is, were and have fought for.