Does Name Of The Wind get better?

[Poobah]

free association

"The way I remember it, albatross was a ship's good luck, 'til some idiot killed it."

KKC would be significantly improved were Denna replaced with RIver Tam.

[Tears of Lys]

Alguien,

If Kvothe weren't such a douche that he pisses off all the wrong people at the University I'd agree he might be a "Mary Sue". However, his lack of tact and huge chip on his shoulder about his heritage are tremendous character flaws. Therefore, not a "Mary Sue".

:agree: And dangerous to himself and others, I'd add. How people can see Kvothe as this Gary-Stu, I can't understand.

[thistlepong]

KKC would be significantly improved were Denna replaced with RIver Tam.

Yah, there's a complex female love interest. Hell, she like a cross between Auri, Penthe, and Fela. But seriously, rather than chasing after a musician with agency, Kvothe would be better off with an experiment as likely to paint with her own excrement as punch him in the esophagus? :bs:

[polishgenius]

I thought Auri was River Tam anyway? Just you wait, she'll be kicking Chandrian in the throat before the series is out.

[thistlepong]

The light hair fooled me.

[Slick Mongoose]

Alguien,

If Kvothe weren't such a douche that he pisses off all the wrong people at the University I'd agree he might be a "Mary Sue". However, his lack of tact and huge chip on his shoulder about his heritage are tremendous character flaws. Therefore, not a "Mary Sue".

My favourite of his character flaws is taking great offence at how everyone calls the Ruh theives, while stealing constantly.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

SM,

Kvothe is a huge hypocrite.

[thistlepong]

How did he grow? I suppose his expectations for his non-relationship with Denna changed, but I found that to be an example of mediocre writing.

I was thinking about this. One of the criticisms that's been leveled is that little Kvothe's precocious sarcastic arrogance is identical to teenage Kvothe's precocious sarcastic arrogance. Looked at that way, and provided you agree, there's no real growth demonstrated in these first two books. Typically, your bildungsroman is the story of a character getting right with society. Kvothe's progressively getting more and more wrong, which is kind of something, really. He starts off outcast, learns to beg and steal, to trespass and burgle, to vandalize and assault, to implicate and murder. In the frame he's faked his own death and accepts his criminal past righteously. So, like, backwards-y.

Not entirely satisfied with that breakdown, yet, though.

[Hodor Frey]

Kvothe is the anti-Mary Sue, he lacks both the usual heroic characteristics of traditional Mary Sues as well as the typical all-encompassing competence. His lack of personal growth probably figures in his tragedy.

[Jaxom 1974]

:agree: And dangerous to himself and others, I'd add. How people can see Kvothe as this Gary-Stu, I can't understand.

Granted my overall understanding with the series is limited compared to many in this thread, and while I am liking the story overall, it's because Kvothe is telling the story himself that I'd look up periodically from my reading, shaking my head because it seemed like he could do no wrong. Even when he was obviously doing wrong.

I certainly don't subscribe to the idea of him bring a Gary Sue, but I can understand why some folks feel that way. There's something inherent about the concept when you're dealing with an unreliable narrator...

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Jaxom,

The unreliable narrator is the biggest reason why Kvothe comes off as uber- everything. He'a pumping up his own story but can't quite keep the inconsistences from coming in.

[Jaxom 1974]

Jaxom,

The unreliable narrator is the biggest reason why Kvothe comes off as uber- everything. He'a pumping up his own story but can't quite keep the inconsistences from coming in.

Kinda what I was trying to say. Whether its true or not, the reader's expectation is that he's going to be this "Gary Stu" because he's the narrator at the same time. Discerning readers can see that there is more to it than that while a casual reader is more likely to dismiss him as uber-everything. It's wny I can understand the sentiment, even if I don't subscribe to it myself.

[alguien]

Alguien,

If Kvothe weren't such a douche that he pisses off all the wrong people at the University I'd agree he might be a "Mary Sue". However, his lack of tact and huge chip on his shoulder about his heritage are tremendous character flaws. Therefore, not a "Mary Sue".

Perhaps just hugely overpowered. Or unrealistically absurdly gifted?

I know Mary Sue is an author's wish-fulfillment for himself, which is why I agree that the term isn't quite accurate, since I certainly didn't get that sense from Rothfuss when I met him.

He's not perfect, just not very written in a way that has a lot of depth or that I find satisfying. People use the excuse that since he's writing about himself, there's the reason, but to me that rings like a hollow excuse rather than reality.

[alguien]

He genuinely likes hyper-competent characters. He doesn't get a pass for it, per se; it's just that if you don't like them, you might find Kvothe (or Ender, or Gandalf) hard to swallow.

See these comparison examples, supposedly as a defense for being over-powered, bug me.

First of all, Ender is specifically chosen as the genius among genius's. The super-genius in all the world. That is the point of his whole story. And he still has to go through a hellish battle-school to improve his skills with people who are trying to kill him. Not only is he written a lot better, with a lot more depth than Kvothe, he has nowhere near the wide variety Kvothe's super-talents.

As for Gandalf, Kvothe's wide variety of talents make the Istari look like an amateur hack. Not only that, but Gandalf is a frickin' angel. He's an EMISSARY FROM GOD. And even he seems to have a little more self-doubt than Kvothe.

I'm still trying to find the time to respond to thistlepong's longer post. A lot to think about.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Alguien,

Hey, if you don't like it don't read it. I've really enjoyed these books, I think Rothfuss' prose is particularly good,while recognizing they are far from perfect. I too found the fairy sex parts weak.

[alguien]

Alguien,

Hey, if you don't like it don't read it. I've really enjoyed these books, I think Rothfuss' prose is particularly good,while recognizing they are far from perfect. I too found the fairy sex parts weak.

That's the thing. I do enjoy them while also being annoyed by them at the same time and skimming over parts.

Thistlepong's quotes two passages that exemplify this for me. I LOVED the part about the sword named Caesura. What a brilliant idea! I found it really well-written. Whereas the other passage of dialog he quoted, that meant to foreshadow the death of a king, I found meandering and boring.

Its like Rothfuss comes so close (for me) in some areas and then completely misses others, so I get frustrated.

Of course, its all personal taste. If I don't wan't my tendency for hyperbole to be misinterpreted that I dislike the books. Its more like a dish with some things I find delicious and some sides I find cloying.

[Slick Mongoose]

Perhaps just hugely overpowered.

I don't think he's particularly overpowered compared to the people he's around. He's a worse fighter than any Adem mercenary and presumably any particularly skilled non-Adem. He's worse at naming than most of the masters (I would guess? How many are namers?) and several students. His sympathy is not as good as the likes of Dal & Devi, and other students have been catching him.

And I can't imagine him taking on someone like Haliax without getting crushed like a bug.

I'm not saying he's not ridiculously powerful compared to your average person on the street, but I wouldn't consider him overpowered in the context of the story.

[alguien]

Perhaps its more accurate to say I find him too diversely powered or talented? Granted, he's not as good as Adem masters, nor as good as naming as the teacher's (that would be a little too unbelievable), but his proficiency in those fields-said to be remarkably difficult to even get into, combined with his remarkable proficiency in a myriad of other fields (music, engineering, love-making, math, chemistry, poetry, etc.) just feels off.

Its like I can get behind an academic genius who is a revolutionary Thomas Jefferson-like thinker who was accomplished at a lot of things intellectually and engineering-related, but I can't get behind Thomas Jefferson also being the most gifted bard in the world and a karate swordsmaster super athlete to boot.

Hah. Now that I think about it, more and more, Kvothe is reminding me of the Bard class from D&D 2nd Edition. :)

[thistlepong]

See these comparison examples, supposedly as a defense for being over-powered, bug me.

First of all, Ender is specifically chosen as the genius among genius's. The super-genius in all the world. That is the point of his whole story. And he still has to go through a hellish battle-school to improve his skills with people who are trying to kill him. Not only is he written a lot better, with a lot more depth than Kvothe, he has nowhere near the wide variety Kvothe's super-talents.

As for Gandalf, Kvothe's wide variety of talents make the Istari look like an amateur hack. Not only that, but Gandalf is a frickin' angel. He's an EMISSARY FROM GOD. And even he seems to have a little more self-doubt than Kvothe.

I'm still trying to find the time to respond to thistlepong's longer post. A lot to think about.

At what point would you start to accept comparisons, though? I've tried to use different ones every time: Batman, Cyrano de Bergerac, Benjamin Franklin... Frankly, once I start thinking about it, names keep coming up.

I'm trying to figure out where your tension lies. I could easily present an internally consistent Gandalf or Ender defense for Kvothe, so that can't really be the problem. I explicitly don't wanna place words in your mouth or thoughts in your head, here. I'm genuinely interested in exploring the objection.

But...

There's always a but. I'll keep it to just one, though. It's looking like you sort of accept the rest of the text pretty solidly and are kind of nonplussed that Kvothe stands out from it as special. Like you'd prefer a more average PoV character?

Edit: to say, huhn, you posted similarly while I was typing

[alguien]

I don't just mean that. It's the story of someone's life, as told by them. The books seem to adopt some of the aspects of the bildungsroman or it's ilk, which is a much more meandering style jumping in at events significant to the character and his growth. Basically, when you say "it seemed to have no real relevance to the story", I'm asking you if you are really sure you know what the story really is. Because the whole dracus thing seems more about learning about Denna and her relationship to Kvothe (which is very important to the character) and perhaps some ideas about the mundanity and lack there of behind legends or some such. And that seems important to the story of Kvothe to me.

I just finished reading Edgar Pangborn's Davy which I think is one of the most well-known bildungsroman in genre fiction. It too, seemed to meander, but it did provide me with some insight as to how Rothfuss may be proceeding. If the point of the dracus was to illustrate Denna, it could very well be why I dislike it, because she is probably my least favorite element of the whole story.

I don't know. Althought the structure is the same, I don't think the point of the story is the bildungsroman, nor is it examining "mundanity and lack there of behind legends."

To me, it seems like Kote, or Kvothe that was, has fallen, has been cursed in some way (like the Ctaeth predicted) so that it seems that nothing he endeavors to do will succeed. I feel like he's been brought low and that we'll see why in the 3rd novel, as well as learn what he is doing to extricate himself from the situation. To me, the point of the story is the silence that's waiting in the prologue. Rothfuss talked a bit about that prologue at Worldcon, how important it was, how it was so special he wanted it laid out on the page in a different way from the rest of the book--which did end up happening and is a bit of a rarity for book layout, as I can personally attest to.