China Mieville on D&D

[Nellisir]

I was *very* hesitant moving into his books, thinking they'd be "out there", but they ended up being superior to just about anything I've read in several years (fantasy-wise, that is).

This was more or less my experience. The "type" of fantasy CM has been billed as has not generally been my pleasure, so I read Perdido Street Station with some trepidation, and enjoyed the heck out of it. I just finished "The Scar" last night, and enjoyed it even more. I'll be looking for "Iron Council" in a few minutes, when I head out to Borders.

[referring to Iron Council] The prose is very, very different from the previous two books. I think it’s to do with bringing the prose under control. The previous two books were very baroque and meandering.

I think that's a fascinating thing to hear from an author, and it's reassuring. I'm not a fan of baroque writing. PSS did take some time to get into, but eventually you start getting sucked through it just to find out what else he's conjured up around the corner.

I definitely recommend giving them a try. Steampunk, very evocative writing style, very deep characters, and overall, very well done. I agree that if you like Planescape, you'll likely love the books.

I didn't like Planescape, and I like the books. I'm not even certain I'd call them steampunk. While it certainly has the overt trappings, it's becomes increasingly clear that magic, pure and simple, is the foundation up which everything "technological" rests. IMO.

It's also fascinating to see someone take the "Taslanta" approach to races -- 100 character races, and NO elves.

And the most beautiful quote of all...

I know there are people playing home-brewed RPGs set in Bas Lag and there is no higher compliment. I am enormously pleased. I had a conversation with someone about this the other day, and I said, “Yeah, I’d love to write the Bas Lag encyclopedia.” And they said, “That’s really bad though, because you’re a socialist. You shouldn’t be writing these books that are just a kind of naked, cynical attempt to cash in on the sad obsessions of the geeks.” And I said, “No, no, no, you don’t understand at all! I can’t imagine anything I’d love to do more than write an encyclopedia of my imaginary world, with the possible exception of writing the bestiary.” I’m in this ing business for the monsters. The monsters are the main thing that I love about the fantastic. And unfortunately, you can’t really sell books of monsters to publishers. They insist on stories linking them.

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

Huh, I must have had a rather strange experience with PSS- I enjoyed the heck out of it for the first couple hundred pages, and then just got completely lost in his action scenes. Just like Neil Stephenson, he's awesome until his characters pull out a weapon. Then you aren't going to understand a thing that's going on until the guns are back in their holsters. (Honestly, most fantasy and sci-fi writers can't do action scenes too well, and the ones who write decent ones tend to be the pulpiest- Robert Jordan and R.A. Salvatore, for instance)

In general, I just found it a messed-up mixture of Charles Dickens and Michael Moorcock... which is an interesting combination in of itself, but I found the incoherence of his created world just a bit jarring- too much thrown in just because it seemed like a "kewl" idea, not enough coherence- Moorcock does this too, but his style is much more minimalist. So I have mixed feelings about Mieville- I think he still needs to mature a bit as a writer, but he could be amazing when he does. Of course, I haven't read his two newer books...

As for his politics... well, that's part of the charm. If I wanted to read fellow liberal-libertarians all the time, I'd read nothing but David Brin. But I like reading socialists (Mieville), anarcho-libertarians (Moorcock), conservative romantics (Tolkien), and the rest of the spectrum, provided they know how to spin a good yarn...

(And if you don't think Tolkien's work was political, well, read Norman Spinrad's take on it some time- "The Iron Dream"- or read David Brin's essay on Lord of the Rings at www.davidbrin.com)

 

[Ryltar]

Don't be naive.

Take out "capitalist" and put in "Jew," "Muslim," or even "Irishman" and see how it reads.

And then ask yourself if a reasonable person could say, "This doesn't sound like someone I'd want to read."

Sorry, Wulf, but you apparently missed my point. "Irishman" or "Muslim" are terms denoting someone's nationality or religion in the real world. We are talking about fiction here.

*sigh* I give up. Don't read the book.

 

[Akrasia]

I bought a book. It was called "Grim Tales". I liked the book.

Then I realised that the author is a rabid, ruthless, Ayn Rand capitalist.

I can't believe I liked that book. It is all clear to me now -- the book is ripe with capitalist evil.

The book is now horrible.

After all, I am Tory!

(Tongue firmly planted in cheek here -- but message encased nonetheless.)

 

[shilsen]

I bought a book. It was called "Grim Tales". I liked the book.

Then I realised that the author is a rabid, ruthless, Ayn Rand capitalist.

I can't believe I liked that book. It is all clear to me now -- the book is ripe with capitalist evil.

The book is now horrible.

After all, I am Tory!

(Tongue firmly planted in cheek here -- but message encased nonetheless.)

Good point, but I think you nailed it already with the Shakespeare as monarchist comment

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I bought a book. It was called "Grim Tales". I liked the book.

Then I realised that the author is a rabid, ruthless, Ayn Rand capitalist.

I can't believe I liked that book. It is all clear to me now -- the book is ripe with capitalist evil.

The book is now horrible.

It's not necessary to continually misrepresent what I said. I never said the book was horrible.

I said it's unlikely I would, at this point, reward the author with my time or money. (In fact that's about the fifth time I've said it.) Got it?

Good point, but I think you nailed it already with the Shakespeare as monarchist comment

Shakespeare has the advantage of history behind him, don't you think? I promise: If I'm still around in 500 years, and anybody still knows who the China Mieville is then, I'll give him a read.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Sorry, Wulf, but you apparently missed my point. "Irishman" or "Muslim" are terms denoting someone's nationality or religion in the real world. We are talking about fiction here.

So if in an interview Mieville had described one of his fictional characters like this:

"Weather Wrightby, for all that he’s a bastard, and a murderer, and a Jew, and an exploiter, he’s also..."

Then that wouldn't be a legitimate reason to cross him off my reading list?

I really don't believe you don't get it. Are you saying that capitalists aren't as real as Jews, Muslims, Irishmen? Or just that it's ok to libel capitalists?

 

[Sammael]

Wulf's line of reasoning is perfectly sound. In fact, I am using the same line of reasoning to justify my decision never to purchase anything written by Wulf Ratbane, because of a series of comments he made a few weeks ago (in which he, among other things, made a blanket statement insulting the continent of Europe and all its inhabitants). Yup. Works both ways.

 

[el-remmen]

/me slips on mod hat

I think there is plenty to discuss about China Mieville's books amd monsters without harping on his politics or using the assumed politics of posters in examples to browbeat them.

Everybody take a step away from the politics please.

Consider yourselves warned.

Thanks.

 

[Ryltar]

So if in an interview Mieville had described one of his fictional characters like this:

"Weather Wrightby, for all that he’s a bastard, and a murderer, and a Jew, and an exploiter, he’s also..."

Then that wouldn't be a legitimate reason to cross him off my reading list?

I really don't believe you don't get it. Are you saying that capitalists aren't as real as Jews, Muslims, Irishmen? Or just that it's ok to libel capitalists?

The latter is my point. It is not okay to use one's religion or one's nationality as a derisive or insulting term. It *is*, however, okay with me to use a term like "capitalist" or "communist" or whatever because it only reflects the speaker's personal view of that charakter (which, at times, isn't even applied correctly and/or with full knowledge of all that the term implies) in order to describe him. So, if the majority of characters in the book refers to W.W. as "a capitalist" because they feel money is more important to him than the wellbeing of his workers, then a capitalist he is. If Mieville uses that term, he uses it in the way most of his characters would. I fail to see the problem with that.

nemmerle: I hope this isn't over the line.