Metonymy posted:

Well, there's obviously something in the series that people enjoy and respond to, so I'm not trying to give a blanket "gently caress Eriksson and this series".

But I did find the interview an interesting read because the author articulated everything that I'm not enjoying about the first few hundred pages of the Gardens of the Moon. My general sense while reading the book is that I am getting jerked around by someone who isn't very committed to (or good at) providing any context or revealing the narrative in a manner that is conducive to understanding what's going on.

In reading the interview, I got the sense that: (a) I'm right, (b) that's non-accidental, and (c) Eriksson is semi-hostile to his readers (he characterizes himself as "evil" and explicitly draws a parallel to a scenario in which he's kind of a dick to people he's playing a game with).

Habibi posted:

I find this interesting, because it's what I get out of that interview. He says he tries to confound readers' expectations, which is not at all the same thing as 'not being committed to providing any context or revealing the narrative in a manner that is conducive to understanding what's going on.' Fact is that he does provide the context and narrative (in fact, given just how many details there are that eventually all (or mostly) link up, saying that he's not committed to doing this makes little sense). What he isn't committed to doing, though, is going out of his way to explain exactly what is going on, which is where I think your point about "intentionally obfuscating..." falls flat. He's not intentionally obfuscating. He's just not intentionally clarifying.

To me, what he seems to say in that interview is that he isn't using a 'guiding' element to move the reader along - something that is common with plenty of experienced fantasy writers, let alone new ones. Wheel of Time is filled with so may convenient little things that just happen to point all of the characters and the reader in the direction they want/need to go (because, you know, ta'veren). Instead, he's basically putting the reader into a world where people know about as much as you might expect them to know, and leaves them to piece it together. Yeah, as you say it's something that flows together over the course of many books (and is significantly better the second time through) but once it all starts coming together, it's magnificent.

Also: 02-6611-0142-1's observation that Erikson "expects you've read all his books at all times" is quite insightful. GotM is significantly improved if you've read all of the other books, and the same goes for every book. This is a bit of a unique property for a series, IMO. Reading ADWD doesn't really make ASOS any better or clearer (if anything, maybe it makes it more depressing ), but reading, eg, Reaper's Gale really affects what you get out of, eg, House of Chains.

Popular Human posted:

To add a perspective to the discussion, I read GotM about a year ago, and while I liked it somewhat, enough things rubbed me the wrong way about it (mostly how the last hundred pages felt like a protracted DBZ battle) that I didn't pick up Deadhouse Gates until two weeks ago, and just finished it today.

Goddamn does it ever get better.

I don't think i've ever read a fantasy novel with an ending that made me so angry, and so looking forward to the next book. I'm in love with series and i'm definitely looking forward to reading through it and figuring out what the gently caress is going on. A couple spoiler-y questions:

1. What was the whole deal with Panek's backstory, the T'lan Imass were crucifying children or something? Or did it go back to that clutch of magic Duiker stumbled across where he got caught up in the one tribe murdering the other one?

2. What the gently caress are Forkrul Assail? Don't answer if it's a giant, multi-book spoiler.

3. In the epilogue, were those gremlin things collecting Duiker's body, and are they going to resurrect him? Just a yes/no - I just would hate for that to be the last we see of him. He deserves awesome revenge.

Electronico6 posted:

1- I actually don't remember anything about that character.

4- They were T'lan Imass and they were hunting someone. Who that someone is will become apparent books later. And so is the ship they were on. The guy that sacrifices himself, closes the wound the crazy mage made in the Warren. Then Kulp uses his powers to get them out, and wake up an undead dragon in the process.

Popular Human posted:

Goddamn does it ever get better.

I don't think i've ever read a fantasy novel with an ending that made me so angry, and so looking forward to the next book. I'm in love with series and i'm definitely looking forward to reading through it and figuring out what the gently caress is going on. A couple spoiler-y questions:

quote:

1. What was the whole deal with Panek's backstory, the T'lan Imass were crucifying children or something? Or did it go back to that clutch of magic Duiker stumbled across where he got caught up in the one tribe murdering the other one?

quote:

2. What the gently caress are Forkrul Assail? Don't answer if it's a giant, multi-book spoiler.

quote:

3. In the epilogue, were those gremlin things collecting Duiker's body, and are they going to resurrect him? Just a yes/no - I just would hate for that to be the last we see of him. He deserves awesome revenge.

quote:

edit: one other question, what was the deal with the guys who come out of the sky while Kulp and the gang's boat is stuck in that Warren? They give Stormy a sword, then they fly into the sky and it's implied one of them is sacrificing themselves for all eternity to get them out or something?

quote:

Goddamn, looking back there was a LOT I did not follow in this book.

Popular Human posted:

That makes a lot more sense, thanks. I guess part of my confusion stems from the fact that I don't really understand what the T'lan Imass are, but I figure that's part of the fun and will be explained later.

RE: #1, he's the creepy kid who rides around on Apt, and apparently can see Cotillion even when he's shrouded in his shadow warren or whatever. Cote asks him where he came from, and he tells him about how he was crucified and Cotillion actually acts a little bummed out, which was surprising.

Electronico6 posted:

Well the T'lan Imass have been explained, not well though. You had Tool in the first book. The basic gist is that there was this race formerly known as the Imass, and they used to be slaves to the Jaghut, and one day the Imass said "gently caress you assholes!" and started a war with the Jaghut. At the end of the war the Imass formed a pact between themselves, they would never rest again until the world was rid of Tyrants(Jaghut). OF course this did not go according to plan.

Habibi posted:

Didn't the Imass only start poo poo when the Jaghut tyrants arose in the first place, though?

Habibi posted:

Didn't the Imass only start poo poo when the Jaghut tyrants arose in the first place, though?

LtSmash posted:

Vanilla Mint Ice posted:

God drat, re-reading all that again made me remember how much of bad asses the Imasses were. That's some cold hard unyielding poo poo right there.

LtSmash posted:

Yeah, the Imass are a serious contender for the title of most cold unrelenting hardasses, and there are plenty of other hardasses in the series. (series spoilers) I think in most other fantasy books they would probably qualify as the ancient evil. They chose to start a generations long war of genocide as vengeance for the actions of a few Jaghut who were abhorrent to the rest. Facing defeat, or rather not being able to advance, they turned themselves into immortal undead and resumed their genocide.

But not only are they unrelenting dicks to the Jaghut they give no fucks for anyone. Human First Empire messing with the beast ritual? Don't intervene or warn them just kill everyone after the fact (and by there own admission only 'many' humans went mad, not all). Other T'lan Imass damaged too much to keep fighting? No release from immortality, but if their death lead to killing Jaghut they got their skull put somewhere with a view, forever.

Popular Human posted:

2. What the gently caress are Forkrul Assail? Don't answer if it's a giant, multi-book spoiler.

Electronico6 posted:

4- They were T'lan Imass and they were hunting someone. Who that someone is will become apparent books later. And so is the ship they were on. The guy that sacrifices himself, closes the wound the crazy mage made in the Warren. Then Kulp uses his powers to get them out, and wake up an undead dragon in the process.

02-6611-0142-1 posted:

My take on Erikson was always that he expects you've read all his books at all times. When you read book 1, he expects you're read books 2-10, kinda.

02-6611-0142-1 posted:

That scene in Deadhouse Gates on the boat gets explained piece by piece in books 4, 5 and 7 if I recall correctly. You're supposed to be thinking "what the hell?" but little bits of context appear eventually.

Vanilla Mint Ice posted:

(T'lan Imass/series spoilers)

LtSmash posted:

Whats even better is arguably the malazans would be the evil empire. Kellanvad was basically a mad wizard who unleashed immortal genocidal undead to conquer nearby kingdoms and then used the subjugated people to build armies to relentlessly expand to everywhere they could. Even when he was mortal he had a reputation of being insane because everything was plots within plots. He was only overthrown because he lusted for more power (warren of shadow + the azath) and allowed his treacherous underlings to consolidate power in his absence. Laseen isn't exactly a kind ruler considering a lot of the mayhem was planned.

LtSmash posted:

Whats even better is arguably the malazans would be the evil empire. Kellanvad was basically a mad wizard who unleashed immortal genocidal undead to conquer nearby kingdoms and then used the subjugated people to build armies to relentlessly expand to everywhere they could. Even when he was mortal he had a reputation of being insane because everything was plots within plots. He was only overthrown because he lusted for more power (warren of shadow + the azath) and allowed his treacherous underlings to consolidate power in his absence. Laseen isn't exactly a kind ruler considering a lot of the mayhem was planned.
[/spoiler]

Lyer posted:

I always was under the impression that Kellanved and Cotillion ascended as a means to an end. Or did they just want that power, explored the Azath, figured out what the hell was happening in the world and then decided to do something about it? (Which was basically freeing the crippled god, not for gain, but out of compassion?)

Vanilla Mint Ice posted:

LtSmash posted:

The T'lan Imass were used sparingly but more than just once. We know there was also the massacre at Aren. Apsalar claims it was Laseen but the T'lan Imass weren't bound to her. Dujek claims that it was Kellanved who did it to weaken Laseen's hold on the empire so chaos would follow once they ascended.

Vanilla Mint Ice posted:

Also, I didn't read Knives of Night but I thought Kellanvad and Dancer let themselves get overthrown because they didn't want to be seen possessing too many thrones at once especially since they figured out how to get the shadow throne.

IncendiaC posted:

I'm pretty sure Cotillion confirms this with Crokus/Cutter in House of Chains. He pretty much admits Shadowthrone and him knew that taking control of both the Throne of Shadow and the mortal Malazan empire would cause both ascendants and other mortals to attack them on both fronts.

Abalieno posted:

I don't know if anyone is interested here, but I'm going through some ABSURD mind bending theories by linking some of Erikson's ideas in the series (in particular the last lines of House of Chains), with Constructionism, Kabbalah, Castaneda's work, "Gödel, Escher, Bach", von Foerster and Niklas Luhmann.

It's crazy because you come out with theories that "explain" what goes on in the Malazan world, only that these theories are actually theories made to explain "ours".

It's as if I'm saying: Malazan mythology is well alive and REAL.

(think a bit of David Foster Wallace + Wittgenstein, The Broom of The System, where Lenore Beadsman, a character, was "aware" of being a fictional character in the book. And where DFW core purpose was to examine if it was actually possible to make a factual distinction between fictional and real world, which also is essentially Wittgenstein pushed to extreme radicalism)

The Ninth Layer posted:

I managed to pick up a copy of Deadhouse Gates at a local bookstore, liking it a ton. I liked Gardens of the Moon a lot too, but it took me about three restarts to give it a fair shot. The plot is still a little confusing but not nearly as bad as it was in the first book, and I actually like being in the dark about a lot of the people and events. Also there are badasses everywhere which is always great to have in any fantasy series!

Habibi posted:

I see so many people complaining about this last bit - the amount of badasses everywhere - and I might too, if it wasn't tempered by the fact that even the strongest badass can (and has) been brought down by a weak mortal with very little badass about him.

Lyer posted:

I love how in most of the books, there's always a character or two that's built up to be some hardass, only to get the poo poo stomped out of them pretty easily.

LtSmash posted:

Of course there are plenty of other groups that are even worse. But Erikson makes us sympathize with them too. The Tiste Edur commit tons of atrocities but you have to be pretty heartless to hate them by the end of it. Hell Kallor burned an entire continent down to spite the gods who would take his kingdom away but who didn't feel differently when you read his parts in the later books?

NovemberMike posted:

There's a fairly standard thing in fantasy where you just have everybody be a bunch of dicks in an attempt to be dark and edgy. Kind of like you have knights in shining armor but underneath they're all monsters. Erikson did a good job of inverting this, where instead you'd have to people covered in mud and stabbing the poo poo out of each other but under all the dirt they're human and they have families and reasons for being there.

Habibi posted:

Or sometimes they have no reasons and they've just been swept up and away by circumstance, which is an equally rare perspective in fantasy novels.

Habibi posted:

Or sometimes they have no reasons and they've just been swept up and away by circumstance, which is an equally rare perspective in fantasy novels.