The Science Fiction and Fantasy Thread: Read the OP, Bridge of Birds, and Murderbot

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > The Book Barn > The Science Fiction and Fantasy Thread: Read the OP, Bridge of Birds, and Murderbot

«‹›888 »

navyjack: Jul 15, 2006

MockingQuantum posted:

Seriously this makes me want to at least add Sword of Truth to our list, except for the fact that there are so many genuinely good books that we want to read. If anyone's mildly curious, our September book is Ancillary Justice, October is Lies of Locke Lamora (and we're actually considering reaching out to Scott Lynch to see if he can grab lunch afterwards, given that he lives 20 miles away and is a friend of a friend), and right now I'm pushing for November to be Bridge of Birds since I'm the only one that's read it.

Oh Jesus. Don't add Goodkind to this. If you gotta add Goodkind, do some kind of reverse-book club where all you read is horrible poo poo. Go from Goodkind to Child-Rapist John Ringo to Incest Heinlein to 50 Shades.

Then make a thread.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 09:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 30, 2024 17:27

Jedit: Dec 10, 2011; Proudly supporting vanilla legends 1994-2014

Mandragora posted:

Brooks is kind of banal in that he started copying Tolkien before that became a big thing, so the first dozen or so of his books are rehashes of LotR except set in a post-apocalyptic fantasy future where the monsters include malfunctioning cyborgs instead of fel beasts and orcs. Eventually he goes full on JRPG with crystal-powered airships and returning technology and stuff, but his prose doesn't really improve noticeably over four decades, which is almost impressive in a weird way. Dude does not want to change his voice at all and his post-2000 stuff still feels just like his late 70s books. It's inoffensive but also incredibly bland.

The Magic Kingdom of Landover books are decent YA.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 10:13

coyo7e: Aug 23, 2007; by zen death robot

MockingQuantum posted:

Seriously this makes me want to at least add Sword of Truth to our list, except for the fact that there are so many genuinely good books that we want to read. If anyone's mildly curious, our September book is Ancillary Justice, October is Lies of Locke Lamora (and we're actually considering reaching out to Scott Lynch to see if he can grab lunch afterwards, given that he lives 20 miles away and is a friend of a friend), and right now I'm pushing for November to be Bridge of Birds since I'm the only one that's read it.

Wizards First Rule isn't bad at all, although it's probably just okay and not good or great. It's just every single other book that is really awful and inexplicably weird.

Ironically Legend of the Seeker, the episodic, comedic Xena-style TV series based on his books is really fun, and the wizard is hilarious (played by the skinny heli pilot from Mad Max).

coyo7e fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Sep 2, 2016

# ? Sep 2, 2016 11:31

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

coyo7e posted:

Sword of Truth isn't bad at all, although it's probably just okay and not good or great. It's just every single other book that is really awful and inexplicably weird.

Our Let's Read thread says otherwise.

The rot starts early.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 11:35

coyo7e: Aug 23, 2007; by zen death robot

Sorry it's 3am I meant to type a novel's title and not the series name v :shobon:

v

I'm still confused by the whole thing where Richard hatestabs people to death, or lovestabs them to death, depending on :reasons:. And looking at the first couple pages of that thread, I totally forgot that he murders a crowd of peaceful protestors because they're stopping him from murdering someone vigilante-style.. The whole thing definitely reads like Bill O'Reilly made a sword and sorcery novel where he gets to kill hippies for being stupid and bad guys for being bad and lesbian feminists because - while he still really loves women, they have to die for holding back him from success.

coyo7e fucked around with this message at 11:53 on Sep 2, 2016

# ? Sep 2, 2016 11:35

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

coyo7e posted:

Sorry it's 3am I meant to type a novel's title and not the series name vv

I gathered that, but my point stands. There's some deeply weird, dumb, and unpleasant poo poo in that book.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 11:48

coyo7e: Aug 23, 2007; by zen death robot

edit: holy poo poo I forgot that Richard's brother literally hires every ~~policeman~~boundary warden to come work security at his party - presumably their union allows for in-uniform moonlighting with overtime pay

# ? Sep 2, 2016 11:58

Strategic Tea: Sep 1, 2012

Abalieno posted:

Well now I want to read it :v:

# ? Sep 2, 2016 13:29

Chairchucker: Nov 14, 2006; to ride eternal, shiny and chrome

THUNDERDOME LOSER 2022

navyjack posted:

Oh Jesus. Don't add Goodkind to this. If you gotta add Goodkind, do some kind of reverse-book club where all you read is horrible poo poo. Go from Goodkind to Child-Rapist John Ringo to Incest Heinlein to 50 Shades.

Then make a thread.

Also a little bit of Piers.

http://hradzka.livejournal.com/392471.html

Reminder that Piers Anthony wrote child molestation apologetics.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 13:33

Fangz: Jul 5, 2007; Oh I see! This must be the Bad Opinion Zone!

I don't think real life read-a-bad-book clubs are a good idea because you are going to find yourself running into people who turn out to be really, really into Goodkind.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 13:41

sourdough: Apr 30, 2012

Strategic Tea posted:

Well now I want to read it

Yeah, that was a nice read, though I'm still not sure I buy it as more than a post-hoc explanation for/reading too much into a muddy, unplanned world (e.g., all the "philosophy of the Matrix" stuff).

# ? Sep 2, 2016 13:48

Darth Walrus: Feb 13, 2012

RVProfootballer posted:

Yeah, that was a nice read, though I'm still not sure I buy it as more than a post-hoc explanation for/reading too much into a muddy, unplanned world (e.g., all the "philosophy of the Matrix" stuff).

Remember that Erikson's a professional anthropologist. The structure of his fantasy world being based on anthropological theory ain't such a huge stretch.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 14:07

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

Abalieno posted:

Because the magic system in Malazan is anti-mechanical. It's strictly the opposite of science. You won't grasp it if you parse it in a traditional way like a system of fixed rules in a roleplaying game. To explain the core of it I'd have to talk about philosophical concepts like "dualism" and an anthropocentric conception of reality.

The thing is: Malazan "spawns" from Donaldson's Thomas Covenant (it's not inspired by it, being completely different, but it's conceptually hanging from the same branch of the same tree). Thomas Covenant is like a pre-modern version of fantasy, coming from a certain romantic tradition. That means, in the fewest words possible: the fantasy world doesn't *exist* as external, objective reality, as we assume our own world, but it's just a "projection" of an internal mental or soul state. A mental "landscape" that turns concrete. Tangible objects and creatures you see are not simply tangible objects, but symbols. As it happens within a dream. The fantasy world is essentially like The Matrix, an artificial construction that closes around you. The writer consciously traps himself within this system he himself created, then "seals" the dome with some horizon occlusion.

Malazan moves from there, if you frame it as post-modern. It has a metalinguistic frame, observing the observation. Observing the world as an artificial creation. It's like Covenant's world, but moved on, looking at that world not from the inside (as Covenant, trapped within) but from the outside, like a writer, writing, observing himself writing. The main plot is hidden, because it's a "shadow" of the text. A lot of this is even amusing wordplay, just for "fun" (see Shadowthrone and Pust, or even Lady Envy, or Kruppe a little bit, being conscious of the "meta" and rolling with it, hovering just a tiny bit above rules without completely breaking them). The magic in Malazan doesn't make sense traditionally because it's not a traditional mechanic. It's not "rules of physics with a fantasy bent". Magic in Malazan is pure meaning. Wherever meaning coalesces, magic becomes real and tangible instead of just an abstraction. Even the sedimentation of a strong emotion of a small community can potentially give birth to a small god (like the Cthulhu thing in book 5). The same as in reality we are driven by powerful symbols and meanings, that give us identity and drive. That construct our lives, creating differentiations as a linguistic system (see constructivism or even some Wittgenstein). Malazan takes this concept and makes it into something tangible instead of purely conceptual.

So, the important aspect to understand magic in Malazan is to observe how it transformed and evolved in the world. You notice how there are "old" gods and new gods. And you notice how the old gods have proprieties that are simply deduced from the societies that produced those gods. Very simple example: if the populations were sedentary or migratory. Essentially: all the gods in Malazan "behave" functionally as real gods in our own world. They are projections of cultural "meaning". And that's what you observe in the evolution of society within the Malazan world, the more it becomes "civilized" the more the gods become blurred, more subtle, representing more complex concepts. Gods evolve along the society that gave them birth. That, if you want to stay concrete, means that the relationship between gods and worshipers is circular. Belief shapes gods, gods have influence on believers. They use and are being used (see what Heboric does to Fener). It's always a system of meaning, and it again comes from a fantasy world that is built as an anthropomorphic creation. A body, that Erikson SHOVES in your face when he tells you magic begins with Krul, who's a god, who created magic with his own body. Or even with Erikson's version of "gaia" the earth: Burn. Or the Mhybe, that is the MOST important thing within all Malazan. A woman who becomes a world. Krul creates differentiations within his body, going from chaos to law. To rules. To systems (or same as the Crippled God has to enter the Deck of Dragons in order to "play" the game, where "playing the game" is yet another metalinguistic pun, since we're talking of a card game based on tarots). Exactly like a cultural system, or the evolution of civilization. So, as in Thomas Covenant the "fantasy world" is a body. An anthropomorphic creation. A filter, a lens you use to observe human life, through human life, through the act of writing (and act of reading as a surrogate of it, or, like, parasitic, or like a bird perched on Erikson's shoulder observing what he's doing with the hope of understanding some of it).

Like a linguistic system the Malazan magic has a diachronic dimension that is even more important than synchronic aspects: it's ever-evolving.

That again means this fantasy world is built as human-sized (even when it project human fears or human struggles, that look inhuman, it's always circular. Same as even the most inhuman species are still kind of human representations anyway). Whereas our own would is (supposedly) built on science. Rules, math. Stuff that is alien to a human dimension, that you can only try to grasp, but that is qualitatively different. (see Heboric flying with the Jade statues in book 4, those statues represent something closer to our world) Something that David Foster Wallace also writes about and defines: "the widening gap between knowledge and experience".

Or: post-modernity. Trying to come to terms with a world that makes no "sense" anymore.

Bakker writes the same stuff, but from a different angle. So it's like if it's complementary and opposite to Malazan.

This is the stuff I like. If you know more of this kind I'd love to hear about it. Sadly I really haven't found anything that comes close... (well, Evangelion, Donnie Darko, Upstream Color, Battlestar Galactica and LOST, these do certain things on the same line with their mythology, but none do it as well and, MOST OF ALL: *coherently* as Malazan)

I'm gonna pick out the bit where I disagree with you:

quote:

Because the magic system in Malazan is anti-mechanical

The use of magic in Malazan is explicitly mechanical - A leads to B leads to C. Fener kicks out Heboric, which leads to his magic handlessness, which leads to Fener getting kicked out by the Obelisk, which leads to Itkovian feeding Rath'Fener to some unknowable demon The climax of MoI is a little russian doll, all the different pieces are picked up, moved around and reassembled. And the explanations given are half-arsed and post-hoc.

Edit: will write the full response this deserves when I'm not on my phone.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 14:51

fritz: Jul 26, 2003

Abalieno posted:

You won't grasp it if you parse it in a traditional way like a system of fixed rules in a roleplaying game.

Didn't Malazan start out as a RPG whose group included Erickson and Esslemont?

# ? Sep 2, 2016 14:59

sourdough: Apr 30, 2012

fritz posted:

Didn't Malazan start out as a RPG whose group included Erickson and Esslemont?

Yes

# ? Sep 2, 2016 15:16

coyo7e: Aug 23, 2007; by zen death robot

coyo7e posted:

holy poo poo I forgot that

Wizards First Rule posted:

His eyes opened partway, the visage of wanton passion burning in them. His breathing was ragged; his hands trembled slightly. He gazed down at the boy.

"Carl," he said in a husky whisper, "I love you."

"I love you, Father Rahl."

Rahl's eyes slid closed. "Put your mouth over the horn, my boy, and hold tight."

Note: this is the bad guy who is not a pedophile.. You see he's working a special magic spell.

quote:

DARKEN RAHL BEFRIENDED A CHILD TO GHOST-RIDE HIS SOUL INTO HELL.

coyo7e fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Sep 2, 2016

# ? Sep 2, 2016 15:55

Echo Cian: Jun 16, 2011

MockingQuantum posted:

Now my book club is hashing out some fantasy options, and I'm curious, I feel like I've read here that Terry Goodkind books are really not very good... Or Terry Brooks, I can't remember. Which was it, and why? I've talked the group out of doing any Robert Jordan books because frankly I'm not that interested in Wheel of Time, but they turned to Terry Goodkind as an option when I shot down Jordan. Nobody in the group has read any of his stuff, though.

Read Carol Berg, or Catherynne Valente, or Sebastian de Castell, or N. K. Jemisin, or Jonathan L. Howard, or Seth Dickinson, or Douglas Hulick, or C. S. Friedman, or Jim Butcher, or Patricia McKillip--

Or literally anyone except Terry Goodkind (and Piers Anthony and John Ringo) unless you specifically want to make fun of bad books. Which doesn't sound like your goal. (I enjoy mockery but personally I'll read the summary of someone else's suffering, I don't want to waste time reading them myself.)

# ? Sep 2, 2016 16:53

sourdough: Apr 30, 2012

Darth Walrus posted:

Remember that Erikson's a professional anthropologist. The structure of his fantasy world being based on anthropological theory ain't such a huge stretch.

Yeah, that's totally fair. And just to be clear, I wasn't being snarky at all, that really was a compelling read, and it does make me question whether there was a coherent thing going on (vs being sure there was not!).

# ? Sep 2, 2016 16:58

Amberskin: Dec 22, 2013; We come in peace! Legit!

Reason posted:

I just finished Engines of God and really liked it. It does archaeologists in space pretty good. A lot more interesting than marines or random dudes stumble upon thing in space.

Go on with the series. The level is quite solidly good, with two exceptions (for my taste): Odyssey and Starhawk. Specially the later.

Chindi is absolutely great.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 18:50

Abalieno: Apr 3, 2011

RVProfootballer posted:

Yeah, that was a nice read, though I'm still not sure I buy it as more than a post-hoc explanation for/reading too much into a muddy, unplanned world (e.g., all the "philosophy of the Matrix" stuff).

The only difference between the stuff I wrote and the stuff you find in the books is that it's not overly explicit and on the forefront as you'd think if you stick to what I said.

But I think every single point of what I said is directly referenced in the books at some point. Of course you have to pay attention to this kind of philosophical layer.

It's definitely true that it's not the definition most readers would give, because that mythological discourse is more buried into the text (and you have to wait until book 4 for it to take shape, or start directly with the Forge of Darkness prequel). And, again, it's why I personally love the new prequel trilogy for how this stuff is even more put on the foreground, and why instead some readers found the newer books too dense and not as fun to read as the main series.

Otherwise, you read Bakker. Bakker writes THAT. In your face. 100% of the time. If in Malazan these mythological aspects are just one idea among many, as a kind of choir, in what Bakker writes it's the main theme. And it's not just me engaging with this stuff, but simply everyone who reads the books.

And while I obviously love Malazan, I also don't think it's perfect (and again, it fits in the same line of LOST or Evangelion, each with its own issues and dealing with an excess of ambition). I compare Malazan to the movies of Werner Herzog, always on the brink between the purest genius and utter failure. Erikson can be very wasteful with his ideas, that is kind of a silly concept considering the 4+ million words of the overall series.

But again, I just can't find anything like Erikson or Bakker (and again a bit of Janny Wurts) in Fantasy or Sci-fi that deliver that stuff. There's of course Dune that inspired it all, and those other titles I mentioned already. I get a similar satisfaction from David Foster Wallace, outside the genre. But what else?

# ? Sep 2, 2016 23:18

Solitair: Feb 18, 2014; TODAY'S GONNA BE A GOOD MOTHERFUCKIN' DAY!!!

Abalieno posted:

You've made a pretty good pitch for me to pick Malazan back up (I only read Gardens of the Moon. It was alright but uneven.). The idea of magic in a fantasy world functioning as a literalization of social and philosophical paradigms is something that's interested me for a while, and I'd like to see something like that in action.

# ? Sep 2, 2016 23:51

tooterfish: Jul 13, 2013

I just found Accelerando on my e-reader and I can't for the loving life of me remember how it got there.

Did I get it on the recommendation of this thread? Is it good?

# ? Sep 2, 2016 23:55

cptn_dr: Sep 7, 2011; Seven for beauty that blossoms and dies

Abalieno posted:

Great words about Malazan

I feel like you could probably make a similar argument about magic in Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell, and I've wanted to write that essay for years, I've just never been able to sit down and find the time.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 00:00

Velius: Feb 27, 2001

tooterfish posted:

I just found Accelerando on my e-reader and I can't for the loving life of me remember how it got there.

Did I get it on the recommendation of this thread? Is it good?

I love Stross and gave up on accelerando very quickly. It's a tough sell, since it's basically him trying to do a by-definition-indescribable-to-humans Singularity: the novel. I'll try again sometime.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 00:14

Doorknob Slobber: Sep 10, 2006; by Fluffdaddy

Amberskin posted:

Chindi is absolutely great.

I'm just starting Chindi so that's awesome that it stands out.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 01:19

Poldarn: Feb 18, 2011

Abalieno posted:

Magic

I've read the Malazan main series and am halfway through the Thomas Covenant books right now. This post was very helpful.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 02:34

occamsnailfile: Nov 4, 2007; zamtrios so lonely; Grimey Drawer

tooterfish posted:

I just found Accelerando on my e-reader and I can't for the loving life of me remember how it got there.

Did I get it on the recommendation of this thread? Is it good?

I liked Accelerando a lot as an attempt at writing the Singularity but it does not pause for breath even for a second (it's aply titled I guess) and ends with even its super-advanced proponent of the Singularity being worn-out and overcome by the changes to his life, the world, himself

For me it was a good attempt at tackling how the weirdness of our future might end up. Stross definitely thinks AI are sinister--if not outright malignant, at least not very concerned with their creators. Some of this he fairly explicitly blames on capitalism: when you teach a living machine to treat all things as commodities and that maximizing commodities is the way you win, they will eventually begin to see humans as commodities, or even worse, obstacles to trading commodities with maximum efficiency. His characterization of them is distant and fairly alien, they just mostly slowly scrape humans out of their lives rather than starting the Robot Uprising.

I'm going generous with the spoiler tag since someone said they were considering reading it. One thing I won't spoiler tag since it's pretty early on: there is a female-on-male rape scene that is not treated as anything particularly serious as a violation of the victim, which annoys me.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 06:45

pseudorandom name: May 6, 2007

Keep in mind that Accelerando is a bunch of short stories stitched together into a novel after the fact, so it is a bit rough.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 06:47

Solitair: Feb 18, 2014; TODAY'S GONNA BE A GOOD MOTHERFUCKIN' DAY!!!

pseudorandom name posted:

Keep in mind that Accelerando is a bunch of short stories stitched together into a novel after the fact, so it is a bit rough.

I liked that effect when I read The Martian Chronicles, though.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 18:30

Iron Lung: Jul 24, 2007; Life.Iron Lung. Death.

I read the first two Raven's Shadow books by Anthony Ryan and really enjoyed them, the first especially. I started the third and even a few chapters in it's pretty boring. Is it worth finishing? I've read some pretty not great reviews. Any recs for similar stuff would be great! I've read ASOIAF, a few from Joe Abercrombie. Just looking for something easy and fun to read while I'm finishing my last semester of nursing school.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 18:40

Megazver: Jan 13, 2006

Iron Lung posted:

I read the first two Raven's Shadow books by Anthony Ryan and really enjoyed them, the first especially. I started the third and even a few chapters in it's pretty boring. Is it worth finishing? I've read some pretty not great reviews. Any recs for similar stuff would be great! I've read ASOIAF, a few from Joe Abercrombie. Just looking for something easy and fun to read while I'm finishing my last semester of nursing school.

Queen of Fire isn't great.

His new book is really good, though. Just read that.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 18:41

ringu0: Feb 24, 2013

tooterfish posted:

I just found Accelerando on my e-reader and I can't for the loving life of me remember how it got there.

Did I get it on the recommendation of this thread? Is it good?

I thought it was a difficult, but amazing book, and I was concerned about not being capable of enjoying sci-fi as a genre after finishing it, because I didn't think anyone could top the final chapters (I was wrong).

# ? Sep 3, 2016 19:07

Xenix: Feb 21, 2003

Megazver posted:

Queen of Fire isn't great.

His new book is really good, though. Just read that.

He has a new book out? I'll have to check it out. I enjoyed Blood Song for what it was, but thought the second book had nothing that made the first book fun and interesting.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 20:20

Evil Fluffy: Jul 13, 2009; Scholars are some of the most pompous and pedantic people I've ever had the joy of meeting.

ShutteredIn posted:

Terry Goodkind is the worst published writer of fantasy fiction and possibly the worst published writer of any type of fiction.

You've never heard of Patrick Rothfuss, I see.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 20:57

coyo7e: Aug 23, 2007; by zen death robot

Evil Fluffy posted:

You've never heard of Patrick Rothfuss, I see.

You've never read anything except Rothfuss, I see

# ? Sep 3, 2016 20:58

Iron Lung: Jul 24, 2007; Life.Iron Lung. Death.

Megazver posted:

Queen of Fire isn't great.

His new book is really good, though. Just read that.

Awesome, will check it out! Thanks.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 21:05

Strategic Tea: Sep 1, 2012

*blows an ancient sex goddess' mind on my first time*

why yes I agree

# ? Sep 3, 2016 21:37

Ornamented Death: Jan 25, 2006; Pew pew!

Strategic Tea posted:

*blows an ancient sex goddess' mind on my first time*

why yes I agree

Still better than Goodkind.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 22:08

StrixNebulosa: Feb 14, 2012; You cheated not only the game, but yourself.
But most of all, you cheated BABA

ringu0 posted:

I thought it was a difficult, but amazing book, and I was concerned about not being capable of enjoying sci-fi as a genre after finishing it, because I didn't think anyone could top the final chapters (I was wrong).

What topped the final chapters for you?

# ? Sep 3, 2016 23:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 30, 2024 17:27

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

Ornamented Death posted:

Still better than Goodkind.

Goodkind is worse, Rothfuss is more annoying.

# ? Sep 3, 2016 23:28

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > The Book Barn > The Science Fiction and Fantasy Thread: Read the OP, Bridge of Birds, and Murderbot

«‹›888 »