Breaking the Author/Reader Contract.

[WizarDru]

Everything the central characters did throughout the entire novel is rendered irrelevant to the story's conclusion, as Pug and Co. suddenly appear and save the world without breaking a sweat.

That sums up a lot of the problems I had with MS&T...most of the series was irrelevant. Most of the major subplots ultimately were unimportant, other than to show that the heroes were a disorganized, desperate rabble. Williams could have told his tale in far fewer words. His writing is good, or I wouldn't have finished the series, but he needed to be edited down considerably. 'To Green Angel Tower' could have been ONE book.

As for not being 'Tolkein-esque'...I got many impressions from MS&T, but that wasn't one of them. Are the Sithi anything but Tolkien's elves with the serial numbers rubbed off? That's how I read them. The Storm King felts very much like a slightly more vocal Sauron, to me. There were other parallels, of course, but that neither hurt nor helped my enjoyment of the series.

I realize that Williams may have been trying to convey a certain message with the ending...I just didn't appreciate the execution.

This reviewer on sffworld sums up my feelings pretty well:

However, after the first book, this trend not only continues, but it intensifies. A great deal of trouble and intense effort is put forth by a variety of characters and subplots that are doomed to simply end in the death of the primary characters. Subplots leading to a smidgin of hope end up in ashes. Major subplots which seem to be absolutely critical to the resolution of the story are thrown away or made worthless, and there is a great deal of unrequited suffering and pointless hope.

The worst comes at the end of the book, where the final resolution is perfectly in keeping with the above flaws. Without spoiling all three books, which despite their flaws are monumentally well written and fun to read, I can say that the final climax in the third book was certainly unexpected and for me unsatisfying. Given where all of the other subplots in the other books eventually lead to though, it should have been obvious what was going to happen.

In short, extraordinarily well written, with fantastic characters and a dark story where madness and death are frequent visitors. Ultimately a few too many deaths, a few too many pointless subplots where primary characters are simply snuffed, and a very disappointing (for me) climax in keeping with the disappointing subplots.

Oh, and minor pet peeve: the phrase is "Eat your cake and have it, too", not the other way around. The point being that you want to eat your cake and enjoy it, and still have it after you've eaten it, without actually sacrificing the cake.

 

[Desdichado]

One thing I hate about Lord of the Rings is that so much is hidden in other books. You ask a question about it and someone cites the Silmarillion or some of his personal letters. Books should stand alone without any required research.

They do stand alone quite well. The reason people quote ancillary books is because they're anal Tolkien fans. Very few other authors would have anyone care to read their letters or rough drafts, but to a large group of Tolkien fans (myself included) that's part of the fun.

 

[Umbran]

If anything in that would constitute a spoiler I would appreciate advice on how to black out the text.

There's two basic ways to accomplish this task.

In the post-editing window, there's a bunch of formatting buttons - one for bold, one for italics, one for underline, and so on. One of those buttons says, "Hide Text" in small letters. Use your mouse to highlight the text you wish to hide, then click the hide text button.

Or, if you like brute force, you can simply enclose the text between spoiler tags, thusly:

{spoiler}This text will be in black{/spoiler}

But use square brackets [, rather than curly brackets {.

 

[Hypersmurf]

{spoiler}This text will be in black{/spoiler}

But use square brackets [, rather than curly brackets {.

[spoiler]Like this.[/spoiler]

-Hyp.

 

[Aesmael]

Thanks for the advice.

Spoiler

Let's see if I understand how it works

Wizardru (love the avatar, btw), was the remark about it being Tolkienesque in response to what I posted? If it was I think you may have misunderstood me. I meant that it is more like The Lord of the Rings than most of those other books commonly called Tolkien clones (perhaps I should have put the term in quote marks). In the parts you pointed out, yes, but especially in the resolution of the story. Those are the only two I can think of offhand with an ending like that.

Spoiler

I.e. the expected hero does not in the end complete the quest. Hey, this is fun!

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

That sums up a lot of the problems I had with MS&T...most of the series was irrelevant. Most of the major subplots ultimately were unimportant, other than to show that the heroes were a disorganized, desperate rabble. Williams could have told his tale in far fewer words. His writing is good, or I wouldn't have finished the series, but he needed to be edited down considerably. 'To Green Angel Tower' could have been ONE book.

Part of Williams' schtick is that his primary character is going to spend much of his time wandering around lost. Every book of his that I've read (from Tailchaser's Song, MS&T, Otherworld, and War of the Flowers) has had that happen.

Brad

 

[WizarDru]

Wizardru (love the avatar, btw), was the remark about it being Tolkienesque in response to what I posted? If it was I think you may have misunderstood me. I meant that it is more like The Lord of the Rings than most of those other books commonly called Tolkien clones (perhaps I should have put the term in quote marks). In the parts you pointed out, yes, but especially in the resolution of the story. Those are the only two I can think of offhand with an ending like that.

Puppet Angel is teh funney.

Sorry if I misunderstood you. I agree that MS&T is certainly more like Tolkien in many regards, and in a positive way. I enjoyed Williams writing (although I think he got long in the tooth, just like Jordan...at least I know when Tolkien did it, he was emulating a specific style, not lacking an editor). I'm not an adovcate of reading a series all the way through, just to say I've finished a book...if I'm not enjoying it, I put it down. So the fact that I finished the series (and that's a lot of pages) should be an indication that while I found the ending unsatisfying, I can understand how others might find it to be a good choice.

And quite honestly, it's been over a decade since I've read the books, so I might change my mind if I read them again. But at the rate I currently read, I'm not sure I'll ever get back to them. Right now, I'm about to start Robin Hobb's "Assassin's Quest", and then I'll skip over to read Kim Newman's "Judgement of Tears" (Anno Dracula 1959). And then? Who knows.

 

[Nellisir]

But at the rate I currently read, I'm not sure I'll ever get back to them. Right now, I'm about to start Robin Hobb's "Assassin's Quest",

Oo, that trilogy was one I thought broke the contract.

Quasi-spoiler alert

Spoiler

See, I like series that resolve (and not to point and laugh, but I never read past book one of WoT. I could see where that series wasn't going....namely, to an ending), and that one just sort of...ended. He wasn't happy. Things weren't perfect. It was not a suitable ending. But after a side sojourn with the Liveship Traders trilogy, she returned to the Farseers with Golden Fool, and lo, all was made well. Contract restored.

Haven't read it in awhile, but the Drinker of Souls trilogy by Jo Clayton. Drinker of Souls is a great fantasy book. It's cool. It's got magic.

Spoiler

And then an astronaut falls through dimensions and hangs around for the next two books (Blue Magic and A Gathering of Stones). It was annoying.

I read Thomas Covenant, and frankly, hated it for reasons already stated by others. I don't even remember the rape scene -- the MAIN character was just too boring and whiny.

But it was a long time ago.
Cheers
Nell.

 

[ledded]

Breaking that contract is not *always* bad.


George R.R. Martin showed me that.

Standard Fantasy book contract: The Good Guys will be good. The Bad Guys bad. While one may tread towards the other side now and then, there will be, for the most part, some sort of line. Great characters will be introduced, liked, invested emotionally in, then stay around through suffering and triumph, to stick it to the Bad Guys in a Big Climax.

Martin breaks many of these molds. Good Guys are not always good. Wonderful characters will be loved, cherished, invested in, then die ignobly. Bad Guys are not always bad, and often turn out better than the Good Guys, or at best, merely cast in the light of misunderstanding.

I know a lot of folks aren't Martin fans but I do thank him for not following the formulae, and at worst writing an interesting series of fantasy books.

 

[WizarDru]

Breaking that contract is not *always* bad.


George R.R. Martin showed me that.

But I don't see that as a contract violation. GRRM illustrates pretty clearly from the beginning that things aren't going to be nice, cut and dried or follow the classic fantasy tropes. The minute that

Spoiler

Jamie, having been caught in the act of incest with his sister, throws the young Stark heir to his near death

, you know that things aren't going to follow your classic gig. That doesn't mean he doesn't kick you in the junk...but since there is no central viewpoint character, it's much harder to say that he's breaking the contract with you. It's clear from fairly early on that he's not writing the classic 'young boy discovers he has powers, rises from tragedy into his own and then defeats the great evil' story, although there are elements of that to be found within it.

Contrast that with over 2000 pages worth of believing that you're reading one thing, and then having the rug yanked out from underneath you at the very end. The former says "fasten your seatbelts", while the second says "Ha! Made you look!" :\