I am a big fan of the series. I recognize the flaws in the series, especially the poorly written sex scenes in books 2 and 3, but for whatever reason I still love the series. The world to me is one of the most interesting. I love the Arlen and Jardir relationship, the way they want the same thing and the way they both feel they are doing the right thing but they are both so different. I didn't think about the 0.1 interval and may lower it to 8.2-8.3 because I remember debating between 8 or 8.5 but I did enjoy the book with my only major complaint being how little time was spent with the two main characters.
If only he let us down with the first cake book, we wouldn't be demanding cake. Shame really.
I can only suggest this thread if you wanna know what the rest of the forum thinks. Otherwise it will all be just repeating.
I just think everyone has been incredibly harsh about the general quality of the books based on their personal tastes, more so than they might be about other books they may not personally like but can recognize the merit of.
I don't think that's the case at all. I can't speak for everyone, but I'm sure each member here has a personal standard they keep. I don't think anybody is judging these books somehow more harshly because of something else. They (books) simply fail to meet that standard and raise a lot of red flags as Danica succinctly said.
If you are going to argue differently, you would be basically telling people that even though they dislike a book (any book) they should appreciate it's merits. Why? If you had a thoroughly miserable experience with the book and you feel like you wasted your time, who cares what merits a book has? If any?
A lot of us are reading fantasy for entertainment, and we're not here to objectively judge any merits, whether they are academic, genre changing or anything else. Most of us read for ourselves, not for writing reviews or papers on fantasy books.
All the people that wrote in that thread wrote their own opinions. Nobody gave any final judgments or absolute truths. Nobody said "this has no merit whatsoever". All of them said, ok I hate/don't like the books because this, this and this. You may think that's unfair because you don't agree with their reasoning. But I didn't find the reasoning anybody gave to be illogical or false. Same for people who liked the book. People just interpret the book differently. And what might be a huge red flag for me, doesn't bother you at all.
Only saying it's not for me, doesn't cut it. It's too vague. And if people are already giving their opinions, I rather they be specific on what bothers them or what they hate and similarly what they liked about the book. I rather read about that, then anybody telling anybody else why their opinion isn't fair.
As you said, in the end nobody can convince anybody to change how they feel about the book.
@Alucard@Reakon@Jon Snow I guess I could sum up what I'm trying to say here by just saying I'm surprised by just how strongly you guys (and people in general) feel about this one particular series. I'm not disapproving or trying to correct or even lecture (though I guess that happened by accident - sorry!), I'm just surprised. Just say if I'm bothering you.
I wouldn't say I feel strongly about it either. Was just personally bored throughout the middle, but the ending was good enough to redeem it somewhat. Books 2 and 3 were redeemed by good back story about jardir and inevra. If I felt so strongly, I guess I wouldn't have continued with it...
I should add that the sex parts don't bother me, but also don't really add anything to the story for me. Surely the 5/10 should be seen as an indifferent score as opposed to strongly feeling one way or the other
That was just my inference, of course. If that's not what you meant when you posted that (specific you and general you) then I assumed wrongly, I guess, but that's what some peoples' tones and word choices had me thinking.
Tone doesn't translate well online. And a lot of back and forth on discussing books would be avoided if everybody just assumed IMO at the end of everyone's posts.
Just don't expect me to write IMO all the time. It's a hassle.
Likewise the sex doesn't bother me, and I may be just forgetting because I tend to skim that sort of thing when it appears in books (not out of prudishness, it just bores me) but did any of these books actually detail the sex? I recall it largely just says/implies the characters start getting busy and fades to the next scene, didn't it?
Yeah the second and third one went into lots of details from what I remember. And it doesn't bother me on a prudish level, it bothers me on a it is rarely described in an entertaining way, by any author. The fourth book he led up to and then stopped.
Generally if I don't enjoy something I'll say I didn't enjoy it, not that it's a train wreck or doesn't have a storyline or some of the other things that were said in that thread. I reserve that for stuff I genuinely think lacks any merit whatsoever and approaches the territory of the objectively bad, e.g. most of the Sword of Truth books.
I get why it can be confusing for people to read such hate for a book you liked, especially when you don't agree/aren't bothered by what others are. I say the kinds of phrases you mention for a range of books, and probably have for The Skull Throne, if you have a look in the book club forum you might be shocked, I go off on a aggressive rant.
I totally disagree I can't complain there is no stew at McDonalds, I really like stew and wish it was sold at McDonalds and think McDonalds would be all the better for adding stew to the menu. I can, have and will complain that Brett didn't do all sorts of things I think he should, but that is my right as a reader. Brett, as is his right as an author can do whatever the hell he wants. Just as you as a reader, can like what he writes.
I think I would have a very different opinion in this series of books if I had not read The Warded Man when it first came out.
The incredibly heated critique isn't reserved for this series alone, Lockie Lamora, Blood Song and even The Name of The Wind get's the same treatment. I think for a few reasons, 1. We read the first book and the author suddenly employs story telling devices not previously used in the first book and 2. We have to wait a few years expecting a certain book and we don't get it, serves us right for reading it when it came out ey? 3. The quality drops
Never gave it a score at the time but these were my initial thoughts after reading this:
I enjoyed the book and I am a big fan of the series but I did find this one to be a bit underwhelming, especially the finish to it. The biggest positive for me was the limiting of Renna which I wanted so badly after the last book. The most exciting thing coming out of it is the direction considering the deaths of many big players. On that topic, I thought all of the deaths when looked at on the whole were a bit too much. Like so many people dying kind of limited the impact of each individual death which undermined the significance of them. Would almost go as far as to say some even seem breezed over. Would have liked to see more Arlen and Jadir but there really isn't a POV I hate.