Support NeoGAF

[Veelk]

Edit: and no, I don't want you to go through the whole book. Tha'd take just as long and wouldn't really get us anywhere. I really cannot see us agreeing on this one way or the other.

What'd take you 3 hours, would take me 23 to go through each event and explain how Kvothe managed it. I'm just saying you're case is easier to prove than mine. And I totally see us agreeing, we just have to go through the actual testing field to verify the answer and then one of us will have to admit they were wrong(which wouldn't mean our personal like/dislike of the book would have to change, just that we were off about the assessment we made). Told you analysis isn't fun. But if you choose not to do it, I get it. Still, I think the 3rd novel is due soon. Maybe a year or two. That said, I'd greatly contest your point of the second novel not being good. In my opinion, it's far superior to the first.

But I understand, and I'd like to conclude this debate on amicable terms.

Edit: The third novel has been started a while ago. I don't know where you heard otherwise, but it's been in the works.

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

What'd take you 3 hours, would take me 23 to go through each event and explain how Kvothe managed it. I'm just saying you're case is easier to prove than mine. And I totally see us agreeing, we just have to go through the actual testing field to verify the answer and then one of us will have to admit they were wrong(which wouldn't mean our personal like/dislike of the book would have to change, just that we were off about the assessment we made). Told you analysis isn't fun. But if you choose not to do it, I get it. Still, I think the 3rd novel is due soon. Maybe a year or two. That said, I'd greatly contest your point of the second novel not being good. In my opinion, it's far superior to the first.

But I understand, and I'd like to conclude this debate on amicable terms.

My dislike for this series aside, I do plan on going through the third book when it comes out. I think it could retroactively make these two better if it's done right.

And no, I think looking at a scene and going, "See, too easy" vs "too hard" isn't really objective. We're both gonna see what we want to see, and we're both gonna find evidence to support our information. But doing so would take forever anyways, and me trying to convince you that I'm right and you trying to convince me that I'm right isn't worth it.

I mean shit, people still can't agree on whether Satan's character in Paradise Lost is the hero or the villain. You'd think tha'd be kind of obvious, but there's enough evidence to support both readings.

I'll disagree with your assessment that analysis isn't fun though. I'm a fan of it; hell, I majored in English. But it's only really possible if we've just finished the same book and have it in front of us with marked pages and the like. At least when it comes to arguing about a main character in an 800+ page brick.

 

[Veelk]

My dislike for this series aside, I do plan on going through the third book when it comes out. I think it could retroactively make these two better if it's done right.

And no, I think looking at a scene and going, "See, too easy" vs "too hard" isn't really objective. We're both gonna see what we want to see, and we're both gonna find evidence to support our information. But doing so would take forever anyways, and me trying to convince you that I'm right and you trying to convince me that I'm right isn't worth it.

I mean shit, people still can't agree on whether Satan's character in Paradise Lost is the hero or the villain. You'd think tha'd be kind of obvious, but there's enough evidence to support both readings.

I'll disagree with your assessment that analysis isn't fun though. I'm a fan of it; hell, I majored in English. But it's only really possible if we've just finished the same book and have it in front of us with marked pages and the like. At least when it comes to arguing about a main character in an 800+ page brick.

That doesn't make any sense. Your argument relies on a lack of justification. The support for why Kvothe can do X is either there or it isn't. If I can provide support that you cannot discredit, then I'm right. If I can't find support you can't discredit, I'm wrong. The only point of contention would be what merits dis-credence. The disagreements over Satan is paradise lost mainly contend over which aspects we value and how we interpret the actions. There is evidence for both, but not on the same paradigm of values. Our paradigm is roughly the same, as I can tell from our conversation, so we would not face such disagreement.

I don't major in english and I go out of my way to do it. If you analyze only that what you like to analyze, you are going to develop some pretty bad blindspots, like I argue you have regarding KKC. You need to wade through the shit as much as the gold if you want to really learn how to use your analytical eye.

For the record, I've read NotW over 2 years ago and I'm mostly going off memory. I feel I'm being pretty detailed, so maybe I could be a mary sue, but I don't know if it's an excuse

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

That doesn't make any sense. Your argument relies on a lack of justification. The support for why Kvothe can do X is either there or it isn't. If I can provide support that you cannot discredit, then I'm right. If I can't find support you can't discredit, I'm wrong. The only point of contention would be what merits dis-credence. The disagreements over Satan is paradise lost mainly contend over which aspects we value and how we interpret the actions. There is evidence for both, but not on the same paradigm of values. Our paradigm is roughly the same, as I can tell from our conversation, so we would not face such disagreement.

I don't major in english and I go out of my way to do it. If you analyze only that what you like to analyze, you are going to develop some pretty bad blindspots, like I argue you have regarding KKC. You need to wade through the shit as much as the gold if you want to really learn how to use your analytical eye.

For the record, I've read NotW over 2 years ago and I'm mostly going off memory. I feel I'm being pretty detailed, so maybe I could be a mary sue, but I don't know if it's an excuse

Analysis takes work, and I'm not going to put work into things I don't like. I simply don't have time to do that. I stand by the fact that if you need some deeper analysis to argue a character isn't a mary sue, that's a problem with the writing.

I'm trying to come up with an example that can't be handwaved with "he's a progeny who studied a lot when he was younger," but even with that justification for stuff, it doens't change the fact that Kvothe overcomes his problems too easily. Even if he's smarter and better due to past experiences, his easily surpassing of obstacles is boring.

Like, there are always those people in school who don't have to study at all but get awesome grades and grasp everything about math without trying. I know they exist. But I also don't want to read a book about said person going through school. There's no challenge, and interesting books are about overcoming challenge. I guess Kvothe is like that.

 

[Veelk]

Analysis takes work, and I'm not going to put work into things I don't like. I simply don't have time to do that. I stand by the fact that if you need some deeper analysis to argue a character isn't a mary sue, that's a problem with the writing.

No, it's really not. It's not even deeper analysis that required to prove Kvothe's case. It's just a matter of checking yourself against preconceived notions, so that your prejudices don't blind you to what is really going on.

But even if it did, that's a nonsense statement to make. Just because something looks like one thing at first glance but is actually another does not mean its a failure of writing but the readers function to be aware of the text. Otherwise, all misdirections in fiction would be bullshit. "What do you mean Verbal Kint is Kaizer Soze?! They build him up as being a cripple all this time! What bad writing!"

I'm trying to come up with an example that can't be handwaved with "he's a progeny who studied a lot when he was younger," but even with that justification for stuff, it doens't change the fact that Kvothe overcomes his problems too easily. Even if he's smarter and better due to past experiences, his easily surpassing of obstacles is boring.

Without providing an example for me to disprove all I can say is this: You're factually wrong.

That response isn't satisfying, to me or you, because all we are is two people claiming contradictory things. You need to provide reasoning I can try to counter, or this conversation isn't going anywhere.

But I can say that the problems that Kvothe 'overcomes' so easily seem fairly persistent in haunting him through the books, and he has to go to fairly ridiculous means just to live a normal life at various points in the story. I can name a hundred different examples of this. And you, by your own admittance, can't seem to name many. I understand why it isn't practical for you to write up an analysis for it, but that doesn't disengage you from the consequences of not providing evidence for your side of the argument.

Like, there are always those people in school who don't have to study at all but get awesome grades and grasp everything about math without trying. I know they exist. But I also don't want to read a book about said person going through school. There's no challenge, and interesting books are about overcoming challenge. I guess Kvothe is like that

Kvothe tries his ass off is the issue. When he's stuck on a problem, he'll pursue it relentlessly. As an example, look at his search for the Chandrian. He goes through an insane amount of bullshit just to get slivers of answers. He applies that drive to his studies. In the second book,

Spoiler

Elodin tells them to find 2 books out of a list of 20, he finds as many as he can and reads as much as he can.

He's an over achiever, but it's a common mistake to think that he (or people in real life with this drive) don't work their asses for it.

 

[Coriolanus]

Can't you both just agree that Bast is a horrible character and leave it at that?

 

[Veelk]

Can't you both just agree that Bast is a horrible character and leave it at that?

I like Bast :/

He was in a cool anthology story.

 

[Coriolanus]

Why do you like Bast? Dude's a dick, and not in an amusing manner.

 

[Veelk]

If you gotta reference work outside of the books to make the character viable...

Dammit, I edited my response to be more pithy. Why did you have to respond so quick :/

I don't feel I have to reference that story, but he hasn't done enough to get a solid bead on him yet. He's manipulative and his morals are out of order for normal people, but given that

Spoiler

he's a fae

, it's justified. I don't know what your problem is with him, so I can't argue against your point, but I think he's alright.

Edit 2: Ah, your problem is with him in a moral way. Yeah, I don't disagree. He is a dick. Amusingly so? Eh, I guess? I find some of the stuff he does funny, some not. But yeah, he's a dick, definitely. I don't think that makes him badly written though, whether he's amusing or not. Whether he's well written is a matter of whether he is justified within the story, not my personal preference of his dick....ishness.

 

[Coriolanus]

I don't see the point to him. The role he serves, getting the MC back to what he once was, can be fulfilled by the chronicler just as well. So could the the cockiness.

Hence we just have an asshat hanging around the tavern to be a sorta cruel sorta sexy sidekick. Meh.

That we might get a payoff in the third book would not excuse having to tolerate his boorish "aint i clever" behaviour for two books.

Don't much care about the morals.

 

[Draconian]

Maybe I'll finally get around to reading the last 100 pages of WMF. The goddess section was so terrible, I just gave up. It was like Rothfuss took a creative writing class in college, wrote a romantic short story, and then adapted it for WMF. Just incredibly out of place and lasts entirely too long. It also completely eliminates any suspension of disbelief for the premise that Chronicler and Bast are actually going to sit there and listen to this pompous windbag talk for hours about his sexual exploits. It's so, so awful.

That leads me to my other complaint that in NOTW Kvothe seems like an intriguing, somewhat likable character, but in WMF he morphs into a dislikable narcissist.

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

No, it's really not. It's not even deeper analysis that required to prove Kvothe's case. It's just a matter of checking yourself against preconceived notions, so that your prejudices don't blind you to what is really going on.

But even if it did, that's a nonsense statement to make. Just because something looks like one thing at first glance but is actually another does not mean its a failure of writing but the readers function to be aware of the text. Otherwise, all misdirections in fiction would be bullshit. "What do you mean Verbal Kint is Kaizer Soze?! They build him up as being a cripple all this time! What bad writing!"

There's a big difference between a misdirection and a mary sue character. I mean, who starts a book going, "I'm gonna make my main character seem super good at everything on the surface, but if you read into it, you'll know he's really super flawed. Aw yeah!" I mean, maybe Rothfuss, but that's a stupid thing to do when writers know that no one likes a mary sue.

That response isn't satisfying, to me or you, because all we are is two people claiming contradictory things. You need to provide reasoning I can try to counter, or this conversation isn't going anywhere.

This conversation will more than likely not go anywhere.

Kvothe as a character feels like if you stuck Harry Potter and Hermonie Granger into one person. That's too much positive for one body to handle.

I feel like this conversation needs to be put on hold until book three comes out. Odds are I"ll go through one and two again.

And I apologize if I sound rude. Like I said, I normally really like debating books and characters, but I also only really do that right after I've read a book. It's been too long and I'm getting books one and two mixed together. And it's too impractical for me to scrub through a 30+ hour audiobook in the hopes of finding evidence for stuff.

 

[Veelk]

There's a big difference between a misdirection and a mary sue character. I mean, who starts a book going, "I'm gonna make my main character seem super good at everything on the surface, but if you read into it, you'll know he's really super flawed. Aw yeah!" I mean, maybe Rothfuss, but that's a stupid thing to do when writers know that no one likes a mary sue.

Rothfuss is writing this because he actually likes clever, talented characters, but ones that don't bullshit their way out of situations. You're right that it's not misdirection, but your argument unintentionally uses the same faculties: that the fact that audience doesn't pay enough attention to the text must be compensated for by the author. The only difference is intent. Rothfuss isn't trying to trick you, but if the audience making erroneous judgements based on faulty, preconcieved notions is a fault of the writing, then misdirections would be considered bad writing. Or, in contrast, if Rothfuss did intend to write kvothe as a subversion of a mary sue, then by your own argument, he is well written.

But for my part, I have a simpler assessment: If people are too careless to pay attention or doublecheck what they read, then that's on them, not the text.

This conversation will more than likely not go anywhere.

Kvothe as a character feels like if you stuck Harry Potter and Hermonie Granger into one person. That's too much positive for one body to handle.

I feel like this conversation needs to be put on hold until book three comes out. Odds are I"ll go through one and two again.

And I apologize if I sound rude. Like I said, I normally really like debating books and characters, but I also only really do that right after I've read a book. It's been too long and I'm getting books one and two mixed together. And it's too impractical for me to scrub through a 30+ hour audiobook in the hopes of finding evidence for stuff.

If anything, I'm usually the rude one in these conversations, or appear to be, but I maintain my point. You are wrong, and I can provide several examples of my argument. I understand that it's not worth it to you to go back and review the material in order to make your attempt at an argument, but that doesn't change the fact that your leaving this without providing evidence of your claim, while I can, and that is essentially the loss of the argument on your end. I tried several ways of saying this without sounding like a dick, I promise you, but it is what it is.

We don't necessarily have to wait til book 3 though. I heard there's some new Rothfuss Novella coming out. Maybe we can discuss that, since it's bound to be written in a similar style to kvothe to some extent.

I don't see the point to him. The role he serves, getting the MC back to what he once was, can be fulfilled by the chronicler just as well. So could the the cockiness.

Hence we just have an asshat hanging around the tavern to be a sorta cruel sorta sexy sidekick. Meh.

That we might get a payoff in the third book would not excuse having to tolerate his boorish "aint i clever" behaviour for two books.

Don't much care about the morals.

Spoiler

The chronicler would have never found him without Bast's help, and his intent to change Kote back to Kvothe against his will is a major plot point and relationship dynamic to the story. He's also the source of various stuff happening in the tavern, like the two guys showing up to beat up Kvothe

. You might hate him, but he does add a different layer of whats going on and, as I said, I don't care for personal likes and dislikes as part of evaluations.

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

Rothfuss is writing this because he actually likes clever, talented characters, but ones that don't bullshit their way out of situations. You're right that it's not misdirection, but your argument unintentionally uses the same faculties: that the fact that audience doesn't pay enough attention to the text must be compensated for by the author. The only difference is intent. Rothfuss isn't trying to trick you, but if the audience making erroneous judgements based on faulty, preconcieved notions is a fault of the writing, then misdirections would be considered bad writing. Or, in contrast, if Rothfuss did intend to write kvothe as a subversion of a mary sue, then by your own argument, he is well written.

I think you're giving him way too much credit as an author.

We don't necessarily have to wait til book 3 though. I heard there's some new Rothfuss Novella coming out. Maybe we can discuss that, since it's bound to be written in a similar style to kvothe to some extent.

I've openly admitted to not liking both of these books. I'm not gonna go grab some offshoot just to have an online debate. You're flattering how much I really care about this, which is basically enough to be a distraction while I work on shit that I'm too lazy to actually want to work on but need to.

 

[Veelk]

I think you're giving him way too much credit as an author.

It's something he said himself, in an interview. I'm not necessarily saying he succeeds, but that's what his goal is. "I like to write clever characters". And Kvothe is clever...

I've openly admitted to not liking both of these books. I'm not gonna go grab some offshoot just to have an online debate. You're flattering how much I really care about this, which is basically enough to be a distraction while I work on shit that I'm too lazy to actually want to work on but need to.

I'm not saying you should. But you not doing it is a loss on your end. If you don't care about that, it's fine, it's just I wanted to make a point of that. Not to be a dick or single you out, but for anyone reading this thread who wants to make the same assertion as you. That they need to actual evidence to support their claims.

Again, I am fully aware how dickish that sounds, and I'm sorry. It's just that this is an argument brought up, again and again, and I've yet to see valid evidence for it, so if people see this, hopefully they'll go out of their way to provide evidence the next time this point of contention arises. And I really do apologize for singling you out for the purposes of this, but it's tiring to go over the same thing, over and over, with different people.

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

Again, I am fully aware how dickish that sounds, and I'm sorry. It's just that this is an argument brought up, again and again, and I've yet to see valid evidence for it, so if people see this, hopefully they'll go out of their way to provide evidence the next time this point of contention arises. And I really do apologize for singling you out for the purposes of this, but it's tiring to go over the same thing, over and over, with different people.

It's a logical fallacy to appeal to the masses, but I'm glad to be in good company regardless.

 

[Veelk]

It's a logical fallacy to appeal to the masses, but I'm glad to be in good company regardless.

I'm not sure I follow. I'm not saying 'I'm right because many people believe me'. I'm saying that most people don't know how to properly argue. You're aware and merely lack the motivation, but look through this thread of other replies. Most don't provide reasoning or analysis, whatever it is they are claiming. Draconian's in particular is barely coherent in the context of what was actually written in WMF. Our argument, whatever else it is, we've agreed that it's verification lies in how much evidence we can bring to the table. That's what I'm trying to emphasize.

My goal is that people become better debators, not that they adhere to my interpretations. Technically, I haven't provided THAT much evidence for some of my claims. I just claimed I could have (which I can). The moral of this story is "Bring evidence", not "I'm right".

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

I'm not sure I follow. I'm not saying 'I'm right because many people believe me'. I'm saying that most people don't know how to properly argue. You're aware and merely lack the motivation, but look through this thread of other replies. Most don't provide reasoning or analysis, whatever it is they are claiming. Draconian's in particular is barely coherent in the context of what was actually written in WMF. Our argument, whatever else it is, we've agreed that it's verification lies in how much evidence we can bring to the table. That's what I'm trying to emphasize.

My goal is that people become better debators, not that they adhere to my interpretations. Technically, I haven't provided THAT much evidence for some of my claims. I just claimed I could have (which I can). The moral of this story is "Bring evidence", not "I'm right".

I said that in the context of you needing to have this debate every time these books are brought up. I don't seem to be in the minority when it comes to how readers perceive Kvothe.

But appealing to the masses is a logical fallacy, so I'm not actually using it as an argument. It's just nice to not be alone.

 

[Veelk]

I said that in the context of you needing to have this debate every time these books are brought up. I don't seem to be in the minority when it comes to how readers perceive Kvothe.

But appealing to the masses is a logical fallacy, so I'm not actually using it as an argument. It's just nice to not be alone.

Ah. Right, then yeah, you aren't. Most people just don't read things carefully enough, especially when something more easily classified jumps out at them. Like the whole

Spoiler

Felurian section

. It was like 60 pages long. People often claim it's all spent having sex. Do you know how much of that was

Spoiler

actually spent on sex

? A few, at best.

Spoiler

Some physical intimacy

makes 5, if you're really generous in your estimation, if you collect them spread through the entire episode. The vast majority of that was spent learning about fae, developing the conflict, developing

Spoiler

Felurian

as a character, some parts that have nothing to do with her....

Yet ask anyone what they remember about the

Spoiler

Felurian section, they'll talk as if it suddenly turned into 50 shades of grey for a chunk of the book, because it's easy to just write it off as a 'giant sex section'

The book is just provocative in a lot of ways, so people react to it strongly, but they often let that cloud the actual content of it. I'm hoping to find someone who read it as thoroughly as I have, which is why I made the topic for the novella.

Edit: Ha. Naturally, the post on sex is the 69th.

 

[Coriolanus]

developing

Spoiler

Felurian

as a character

Heh.

 

[Veelk]

Everyone, the novel comes out in a few more hours, so I'm bumping in in case anyone wants to come on board. Will post my review whenever I get the time.

 

[Brakke]

That second book was such a brick wall to all the momentum from the first. Will probably check this out cuz Why The Hell Not? but I can't say my expectations are too high.

 

[spootime]

Second book really is hard to get through. I think I know ~3 people personally who have straight up stopped after they realized that

Spoiler

after felurian is the sex ninjas.

Spoiler

ps: the adem not knowing how human reproduction works may be the worst thing I've ever read in a fantasy novel.

 

[Conkersbadfurday]

ps: the adem not knowing how

Spoiler

human reproduction works

may be the worst thing I've ever read in a fantasy novel.

I'd say top two or three. Still doesn't compare to the garbage Terry Goodkind put out.

 

[Trojita]

Finish the last book.

 

[Blizzard]

I realize liking the first two Rothfuss books in the series may be a minority opinion, but I think they were reasonably entertaining, though Kvothe obviously is a bit of a divisive protagonist. It's been a while since I read them, but I also seem to recall the alchemy-ish magic was neat.

I really like the titles in the series, though. The Name of the Wind, The Wise Man's Fear, and The Slow Regard of Silent Things. They all seem lovely and evocative to me, and remind me a bit of Pink Floyd album titles (e.g. The Delicate Sound of Thunder).

The new book arrives for me tomorrow, though in my old age I've become an incredibly slow reader and am in the middle of 4-5 other books, so who knows when I'll get to it.

 

[Darryl]

Ah. Right, then yeah, you aren't. Most people just don't read things carefully enough, especially when something more easily classified jumps out at them. Like the whole

Spoiler

Felurian section

. It was like 60 pages long. People often claim it's all spent having sex. Do you know how much of that was

Spoiler

actually spent on sex

? A few, at best.

Spoiler

Some physical intimacy

makes 5, if you're really generous in your estimation, if you collect them spread through the entire episode. The vast majority of that was spent learning about fae, developing the conflict, developing

Spoiler

Felurian

as a character, some parts that have nothing to do with her....

Yet ask anyone what they remember about the

Spoiler

Felurian section, they'll talk as if it suddenly turned into 50 shades of grey for a chunk of the book, because it's easy to just write it off as a 'giant sex section'

The book is just provocative in a lot of ways, so people react to it strongly, but they often let that cloud the actual content of it. I'm hoping to find someone who read it as thoroughly as I have, which is why I made the topic for the novella.

Edit: Ha. Naturally, the post on sex is the 69th.

People definitely overstate a lot of the sections of this book. These books try to appeal to a lot of different tastes at once. I think Rothfuss had a very clever way of doing it. So yea, there's a weirdo sex scene. But it's short, and it almost apologizes for itself by giving you other reasons to enjoy that part of the book. If you're older and more well-read, you've got to read these books with some tolerance of things you dislike if you want to enjoy it. It isn't perfect, but it's very clever. Probably the most clever set of books I've ever read.

 

[lightus]

I loved the first two books. They had some glaring flaws, but I just found the act of reading the book itself so enjoyable I over look them.

I typically read books to escape from my everyday stress and these books accomplished that well. I'm really looking forward to the novella. I just need to hurry up and finish my current book now!

 

[Clegg]

I can never accept the Kvothe is a Mary Sue simply because he fucks up so much. The frame story is the most intriguing for this as it's implied that the world has gone to shit due to Kvothe's action/inaction.

 

[Veelk]

If people don't start learning to spoiler their spoiilers, I'm going to have to ask the mods to step in here.

ps:

Spoiler

the adem not knowing how human reproduction works may be the worst thing I've ever read in a fantasy novel.

Fun fact:

Spoiler

The adem are based on these Triobriand Islanders whose natural diet had contraceptives in it. As a result, they too didn't believe pregnancy was caused by sex so much as the spirits of the dead re-entering life via women. They too didn't believe men contributed to pregnancy in any way.

To be honest, there are ways the adem should know better and it might be one of the few things that the writer messed up on, but you have to go deeper to find the contradictions in their logic than what you'd expect, because at the surface level, the Adem's reasoning is pretty sound, all things considered.

 

[sirap]

Just finished reading. I'm a grown ass man, but this book brought me to tears. Never before have I cared so deeply for a fictional character.

Damn you Rothfuss.

Have no words to describe my feelings. If anyone deserves a happy ending, it's Auri

 

[Fleet_of_Foot]

Not wanting to pay $10 for a short ebook, just yesterday I cancelled my preorder for this book. As the cancellation was going through, I noticed that whenever I preordered it, months ago, I'd been locked into some price point around $5. But it was too late to undo the cancellation, and now my price is up around $10 again. Which I'm not paying.

I shouldn't have been so hasty with my clicking!

And count me as someone who loves the first two books, but is not interested in Auri at all. But I do still want to read it at some point.

 

[Veelk]

Not wanting to pay $10 for a short ebook, just yesterday I cancelled my preorder for this book. As the cancellation was going through, I noticed that whenever I preordered it, months ago, I'd been locked into some price point around $5. But it was too late to undo the cancellation, and now my price is up around $10 again. Which I'm not paying.

I shouldn't have been so hasty with my clicking!

And count me as someone who loves the first two books, but is not interested in Auri at all. But I do still want to read it at some point.

Try to contact amazon. They might let you reclaim it for that price.

 

[MartyStu]

Rothfuss has always struck me as one of the least impressive of the newer wave of writers.

Smart guy, middling writer.

That aside, I will totally pick this up. He is definitely my guilty pleasure.

 

[Darryl]

I'm not exactly far in it yet. From what I've read so far, it looks like he read The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time. Which I did like very much, too. It's cute.

 

[Clegg]

Finished it. Lovely little insight into Auri's character.

I'll put this bit behind spoilers:

Spoiler

She's a Shaper. She just has to be. And unless I'm missing something, Kvothe may do something very bad by her. Unwittingly probably, but bad all the same.

 

[Veelk]

I finally managed to finish reading it. Now I can finally write my review of it.

It has VERY light spoilers, but anything major is spoilered.

I don't know if I'd call anything in here Rothfuss' strongest writing per se, but as usual, he does have his moments, as well as the general pacing and flow of the story. The wordplays and such are all here, from the perspective of a character uses them to weird but fascinating effect.

But the actual content of the story comes across as sparse. People complained about Bast's story just being a day in his life, but that was a short story. This is a novella, and it's a week in the life of Auri. There is no 'big' conflict except for her trying to pick out a gift for Kvothe and shit getting in the way of her doing that.

This novella pretty much lives and dies by how much you like Auri. I don't dislike her but I felt there are a lot more compelling characters in KKC. Still, there is a certain sweetness to her. Rothfuss's greatest strength as a writer is that he has a way with words that can just make a scene very iconic for me. There are a good dozen of them in here, but the one that resonated with most was this.

HERE IS A QUOTE FROM THE STORY I CONSIDER TO BE REALLY GOOD. IT DOESN'T EXACTLY SPOIL ANYTHING EXCEPT A TINY BIT OF AURI'S FEELINGS ON AN ASPECT OF HER LIFESTYLE, BUT I PUT A WARNING HERE JUST IN CASE

Spoiler

She’d strayed from the true way of things. First you set yourself to rights. And then your house. And then your corner of the sky. And after that . . .

Well, then she didn’t rightly know what happened next. But she hoped that after that the world would start to run itself a bit, like a gear-watch proper fit and kissed with oil. That was what she hoped would happen. Because honestly, there were days she felt rubbed raw. She was so tired of being all herself. The only one that tended to the proper turning of the world.

The italicized bit is the one that just made it for me. It's a feeling I find very relatable and powerful. Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I think everyone has a something

Spoiler

they do, something they make sure is done, something whose importance only you seem to see. You yearn for someone to see it, because it's a loneliness that stays with you. It doesn't matter how many people are around, you're alone if they don't see it too.

For me, as I'm sitting here and typing it out, I'm having difficulty pinning down my exact feelings. Did I enjoy reading it? I can name several scenes that I liked, yet it really is a meandering story with not much happening, which I didn't like as I was reading it (Not that I expected anything in particular to happen). I feel it's one of those stories I'm going to have clearer feelings on when I reread it sometime down the line. But the best I can say is that if the above quote speaks to you, this might be worth your time.

Spoiler

I thought I would be more annoyed about not seeing Auri interact with Kvothe after all that build up, but I'm surprisingly not. It resolved the central conflict, and Kvothe's reactions are predictable enough that I'm not worried about missing the scene. I almost wonder if it lead up to one of the conversations that Kvothe had with her in the book. I know at one point, she gave him a candle, and I'm wondering if that was it, but I don't recall the other two gifts being mentioned.

 

[Blizzard]

Veelk, I'm avoiding quoting or highlighting your post since I'm only maybe 25% through the story myself, but some of what you said resonates with me a bit: I like the story, and I like Auri, but it's hard to find good words to describe the book to others. As in, how unusual the writing is, and how she is a strangely sweet character.

The odd, partially made-up words she uses and the names she gives things make reading it less smooth than other books might be, but it has drawn me in. I am pleasantly surprised by all the illustrations as well. The dark, cross-hatched style works well with the mystery of things. It almost makes me think of a book version of Myst -- finding out about Auri and the lost mysteries of the tunnels by clues, rather than by being explicitly told.

It's also kind of interesting Rothfuss felt strongly that some people would dislike how strange it is. He has a section before the story telling people that they might not want to buy it, and here is how they can decide if they may enjoy it. I also glanced at the ending section he wrote, and he apparently thought that readers would be very upset as well, but one of his friends helped convince him to go through with it anyway.

 

[capslock]

Trying to keep an open mind, but man, everything about this series sounds annoying.

 

[Veelk]

Veelk, I'm avoiding quoting or highlighting your post since I'm only maybe 25% through the story myself, but some of what you said resonates with me a bit: I like the story, and I like Auri, but it's hard to find good words to describe the book to others. As in, how unusual the writing is, and how she is a strangely sweet character.

The odd, partially made-up words she uses and the names she gives things make reading it less smooth than other books might be, but it has drawn me in. I am pleasantly surprised by all the illustrations as well. The dark, cross-hatched style works well with the mystery of things. It almost makes me think of a book version of Myst -- finding out about Auri and the lost mysteries of the tunnels by clues, rather than by being explicitly told.

It's also kind of interesting Rothfuss felt strongly that some people would dislike how strange it is. He has a section before the story telling people that they might not want to buy it, and here is how they can decide if they may enjoy it. I also glanced at the ending section he wrote, and he apparently thought that readers would be very upset as well, but one of his friends helped convince him to go through with it anyway.

I think Rothfuss hit a feeling that we don't like to acknowledge: how we feel we are broken in some way. I was actually just thinking about something similar to this as I was walking down the road a few days before. It's not something anyone advertises, so we feel we are the only one with this feeling, when in reality plenty of people feel the same way. I can see how it's difficult to sell it to someone based on that. "Hey, you know how you are fucked up in some irreparable way? I got just the book you can relate to!"

He's also right in how this story doesn't do the things normal stories do. No dialogue, for instance. I would have expected her to atleast talk to herself or something, but no. "Slow regard of silent things", indeed. It's got very little action and things happening, and the things that do happen are strange because Auri is a strange girl.

But it does have some powerful things to say, I think. And so do you. And apparently, a lot of people that even the author didn't think would. So yeah, it's a very odd duck. But it's also an interesting duck, and that may be ultimately all that matters.

Trying to keep an open mind, but man, everything about this series sounds annoying.

Go for it, if you want. And I'm not the author or publisher. I don't have a particular stake if you like it or not. As a fan, all I do ask is that if you do decide to read it, I will always prefer deep and well thought out posts on it. I don't really care if they're positive or negative, but the best discussions happen when people put effort into their replies. And the KKC series makes this a bit difficult because the author seems to like taking concepts that are traditionally bad like hyper talented protagonists and go "Yo, I heard you don't like this trope. WELL WATCH ME MAKE IT AWESOME!!!11"

It's a...provocative series, I think, to people who respond to things at first glance. But for the most part, when you dig deeper, you find inner workings that make the event you write off as absurd more plausible than you'd initially think. So go ahead. If you want to chance it, read it. I won't mind if you come back and write how you hate it. And I'd love it if you came back with a criticism that reveals flaws I just can't seem to find. But best case scenerio for you would be if you were just introduced to a story you like, I think.

 

[Yonafunu]

Maybe there should be a KKC OT or something.

 

[Kieli]

My two main criticisms with the book are that (1) its prose is pedestrian at best (e.g. there's no beauty to his language, it's all functional and stiff), and (2) what actually happens in the first book is underwhelming given the synopsis promised on the back.

I really wanted to read what that, and not so much small Kwothe going through

Spoiler

magic high school and facing bullies

.

 

[MartyStu]

My two main criticisms with the book are that (1) its prose is pedestrian at best (e.g. there's no beauty to his language, it's all functional and stiff), and (2) what actually happens in the first book is underwhelming given the synopsis promised on the back.

I really wanted to read what that, and not so much small Kwothe going through

Spoiler

magic high school and facing bullies

.

Funny you say that as his prose may very well be his greatest claim to fame.

I think it goes well beyond functional though. It is generally pretty fluid and mostly well thought out. Certainly better that the more workhorse quality of the likes of Sanderson and Weeks (both better writers, even though I dislike the former).

I actually agree with you in regards to the general plotting and characterization though.

 

[Blizzard]

My two main criticisms with the book are that (1) its prose is pedestrian at best (e.g. there's no beauty to his language, it's all functional and stiff), and (2) what actually happens in the first book is underwhelming given the synopsis promised on the back.

I really wanted to read what that, and not so much small Kwothe going through

Spoiler

magic high school and facing bullies

.

Just to clarify, are you referring to the main trilogy (The Name of the Wind / The Wise Man's Fear) or the Auri book?

It's admittedly been a while since I read the original two books, but I don't remember the writing there being as unusual as The Slow Regard of Silent Things.

 

[Veelk]

Just to clarify, are you referring to the main trilogy (The Name of the Wind / The Wise Man's Fear) or the Auri book?

It's admittedly been a while since I read the original two books, but I don't remember the writing there being as unusual as The Slow Regard of Silent Things.

It's really not. I don't know how you can describe the prose as functional when the prologue and goes out of it's way to describe silence metaphorically and includes phrases like "The cutflower sound of a man waiting to die." The entire book uses metaphors and similies to describe various things and includes such nonsense language just to sound nice. TSRoST doesn't use remarkably more of that. It's functional in that the artsy language is often there to help gain a better understanding of something or someone, but it's certainly not like reading the Dresden Files or something.

As for the other criticism....*shrug* Kvothe does do plenty of epic things, especially in the second novel, but yeah, the novel does spend a lot of time with him just living his life ordinarily, where he has to be careful about things like paying tuition. I don't find it to be a flaw, since characterization and plotting is generally happening pretty consistently. I wish he had made more leeway in

Spoiler

finding the chandrian

, I guess, but the larger point of the story is how insanely hard it is to do so.

 

[charsace]

First book is great, second is so-so. This novella is a waste of time. Should have invested that time in writing the 3rd book.

 

[Blizzard]

The Dresden Files are one of my favorite fantasy series ever, so if that's functional prose then I don't mind it.

I'm about 1/3 of the way through The Slow Regard of Silent Things now, 50-ish pages in. I am liking Auri's character even more the more I read. It's been so long since I read the other books I may have forgotten some hints or details from them about her, but either way I like it. SPOILERY thoughts at this point:

Spoiler

I probably guessed something of this nature was the case, but it was still pretty impactful when after 50 pages of the childlike fanciful names and descriptions Auri uses for everything, aside from the occasional comparisons to some specific thing only an adult / aboveground person would know about, you hit a juxtaposition like this:

"Now, with the water to this piece of pipe turned off entire, there was every chance that something vital up above was all alack. No knowing what. The pipe could lead to some disused piece of Mains, where it could stay dry for years with no one anyways the wiser.

But perhaps it led to the Master's Hall, and right now one of them was halfway through a bath. What if it led to Crucible, and some experiment left to calmly calcinate was instead undergoing unintended exothermic full cascade?"

It's not too surprising that just after thinking about various technical aspects of alchemy, she has a panic attack (or at least that's how I interpreted it). Poor girl.

 

[Veelk]

The Dresden Files are one of my favorite fantasy series ever, so if that's functional prose then I don't mind it.

I'm about 1/3 of the way through The Slow Regard of Silent Things now, 50-ish pages in. I am liking Auri's character even more the more I read. It's been so long since I read the other books I may have forgotten some hints or details from them about her, but either way I like it. SPOILERY thoughts at this point:

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I wasn't shit talking Dresden Files. If anything, the exceptionally plain and straightforward prose allows me to read it at a pace that I find just impossible with other books, and it tells a great story beneath that prose. If there is any better example of prose that seems to exist purely for function instead of aesthetic purposes, I can't think of it.

But it's certainly not something I'd describe KKC as having.

I won't comment on the spoilered bits except to say that I agree. She reminds me very much of River Tam from Firefly. I heard that people find her more like Luna Lovegood from Harry Potter, but I don't think that properly conveys the type of general weirdness Auri has.

 

[Blizzard]

Hermione and Luna were my two favorite Harry Potter characters, but I do think Luna is a different situation than Auri.

 

[MartyStu]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I wasn't shit talking Dresden Files. If anything, the exceptionally plain and straightforward prose allows me to read it at a pace that I find just impossible with other books, and it tells a great story beneath that prose. If there is any better example of prose that seems to exist purely for function instead of aesthetic purposes, I can't think of it.

But it's certainly not something I'd describe KKC as having.

I won't comment on the spoilered bits except to say that I agree. She reminds me very much of River Tam from Firefly. I heard that people find her more like Luna Lovegood from Harry Potter, but I don't think that properly conveys the type of general weirdness Auri has.

Stephen King. And if we really want to range away from Fantasy/Sci-Fi: James Patterson.

Blegh.

The be honest, quite a few of the 'young guns' of speculative fiction have to a great extent exhibited this tendency.

Thank god for Mieville. And to a much lesser extent: Lynch and Rothfuss.