|
Post by brutalis on Apr 22, 2020 7:41:05 GMT -5
Talk about a book you have to force yourself to slog through. The Shadow Throne: Shadow Campaigns book 2: Django Wexler is one of those. I really enjoyed the 1st book and there was plenty of world building and characters to draw my interest into picking up books 2 and 3 last summer. The focus this book is mainly upon one character while all the others from the 1st book are pushed aside (which may explain my dislike) for the duration of this one. While the story mildly advances the plot I felt it went too far astray focusing upon the political aspects which could as easily been reduced to half of the book allowing the other characters some story space. A lot of plotting and planning and arguing for a behind the scenes revolutionizing as the King of Vordan dies and the "villain" attempts to take control of the city away from his ascending daughter.
Since I have book 3 I will endeavor to read through it (at another time after rinsing my mind with something else) in hopes of finding a return to the more adventurous military magical story. Book 4 came out back in 2016 and as yet I haven't bought it so I may never "finish" reading the story at all. Really sad as that 1st book premiered with lots of potential within the whole muskets and magic idea.
|
|
|
Post by Calamas on Apr 22, 2020 10:23:55 GMT -5
At this point you know what you're going to get with Collins' Heller books. Heller is going to be thrust into history and there's most likely going to be something happening that isn't quite the way history portrays it. The research seems to be solid, the execution is fun and compelling and they're a great easy read. Reminds me that I need to start picking up Collins stuff again. I have quite a few of his earlier works I grabbed up used and I really like his Heller and Quarry series. I have several of his historic/disaster books and they were okay, just not as interesting in characterization or depth as i felt they were quick cash makers for the publishers and something which took Collins away from his own personal best. What really sucks is that he has either become a writer people follow and hold onto his books or his books aren't high profile and big sellers since I seldom if ever find his series or any of his books in the used book stores around Phoenix like I used to. Granted there is a lot less stores to choose from and none are mom and pops family run storefronts anymore which might be the problem. Looks like I shall have to begin searching and creating a hunt list of what I need and then start digging for those deep deals via Amazon and online! I suspect more the latter as bookstores have clamped down on their expenses. I used to regularly see at least a half dozen of his paperbacks in stock, and his Disaster series, which I agree was subpar--at least the few that I’ve read--used to get prominently displayed. Lately, the last hardbacks I saw was the final few Heller entries--perhaps because they involved Marilyn Monroe, the Kennedys and McCarthy. As for paperbacks I usually see maybe two Hardcase books, one of which is removed as each new one comes in.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2020 2:37:25 GMT -5
Finished Will Eisner's Shop Talk earlier this evening... It consists of a series of interviews with comic creators Eisner conducted between late 1980 and 1983, most originally appeared as back matter in either The Spirit magazine or Will Eisner Quarterly. Interviewees include Neal Adams, C.C.Beck, Milton Caniff, Jack Davis (with Harvey Kurtzman kibitzing during the interview), Lou Fine's partner Gill Fox (about Lou Fine), Gil Kane, Jack Kirby, Joe Kubert, Harvey Kurtzman (solo this time), Phil Seuling (the only non-creator in the bunch), and Joe Simon. Eisner focused on the same themes in each interview-the creator's history in the industry (how they broke in, where they worked, a lot of whys and wherefore's), the techniques used in creating comics, their philosophy/approach to creating comics, and their vision of the future of comics, though not all were touched upon in equal depth by each interviewee. I read each interview as a separate unit, reading the entire interview in one sitting (the Caniff interview was the longest, the Beck interview the shortest), and allowing time for myself to digest each interview before reading the next (usually only one interview per day, often with a day or so between interviews) so I would not conflate the views of different creators. The only two I read the same day were the last two-Seuling and Simon as they were different enough to keep straight, but still left a few hours between reading each of them. There was a lot of thought-provoking stuff. I was particularly fascinated by the discussions of the future of comics, remembering these were conducted between '81 and '83 for the most part when the direct market was a rising force in the industry by the bulk of sales were still form newsstands (Eisner remarks in the interview with Joe Simon that about 30% of Marvel's sales the time came from the direct market-and Simon's response was interesting-that this was a harbinger of doom for the industry since it meant newsstand sales, and thus access to new customers to replenish the audience, was slipping. A lot of it has to be viewed in hindsight of course, but there was some interesting trends in those who went into more depth about their vision of the future of comics. Some of focus of this were different-Adams was more focused on creator rights and ownership, Canniff focused on the world of syndicated strips not comic books, Beck was retired so didn't have much to say on the future of comics, etc. Only Sueling saw the future lying in sticking with monthly periodicals on newsprint. The rest (among those who expressed their vision, not all did) thought comics future lie in leaving the periodical format behind, leaving newsprint for better paper and abandoning the archaic coloring techniques that had been used since the inception of the comic book for better techniques that allowed for more lavish and varied coloring techniques and less reliance on the black lines of current production standards (Kurtzman was the most vocal on that last point). Seuling, on the other hand, felt comics needed to go back to the cruder art styles and techniques of the golden age, feeling stories and plots had become too complicated and too long. He saw a two tiered world of comics, with monthly newsstand comics remaining cheap and returning to its roots in Golden Age style storytelling being products for the masses and the industry staple, and higher-priced, higher production value special projects that were the exclusive domain of the direct market, but these were special done in one or limited release projects, not ongoing titles. But for most, if comics were to have a future, they would have to transcend the limitations of the monthly periodical format, the assembly line nature of monthly comics, the terrible reproductions of newsprint and the antiquated coloring processes associated with it, and the restraints of corporate owned properties (none of them thought much of things like shared universes or continuity seeing them as impediments to originality and creativity-even Seuling who came at it form more of a fan perspective thought those things were impediments to the long-term commercial success of comics and were at best marketing tools that had outlived their usefulness by the early 80s). Again this was the early 80s and if we look at where comics went after that, and where they are at now, it seems that their visions were ignored in the short term and a lot of the accrued problems the industry has seen in recent years are the result of that, and that a lot of what they called for is the area where the only real growth in the market is now occurring nearly 40 years later. It was a very different perspective on the world of comics, from a generation of creators who did not grow up as fans of comics and didn't seek out careers in comics because they were fans. Some had real passion for the art form, and the possibilities it offered in creating unique and meaningful content (Eisner chief among them), but none of them conflated comics with super-hero universes and stories, even the ones who spent most of their career creating those things. And as interesting as their discussion of the future of comics was (and it was by far the smallest portion of the interviews in most cases), the discussions of their approach and their techniques was just as, if not more fascinating to me, but there is too much there to get into here. Well worth checking out if you are a fan of the creative process of comics, the philosophy of comics or the history of comics. -M
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 1:07:06 GMT -5
I've mentioned my recent interest in Afrofuturism, but I had read absolutely nothing from that genre (pretty much Black Panther-the film and the Coates run-is the closest I have come to experiencing anything of it). As I explored Hoopla's offerings for April, I discovered a bunch of stuff by Octavia E. Butler, whose early stuff is kind of a precursor to the Afrofuturism movement, and decided maybe this was a decent place to start. Selecting almost at random, I read Dawn, the first book of the Xenogenesis trilogy... which was released circa 1987 at the very tail end of the Cold War era, so it still has elements of Cold War apocalyptic themes as well as the seeds of Afrofuturism. The story revolves around an African-American woman named Lilith, who is one of only a handful of survivors of a nuclear was between the US and the USSR which has devastated the planet and left it int he throes of a nuclear winter. The survivors have been gathered up/collected by an alien race called the Oankali. It opens with Lilith waking in a sparse cell after an extended period in suspended animation and she learns the truth of her situation slowly as we the audience does, and we also learn the fate of the earth as we learn of Lilith's situation. The Oankali are a race with three genders (male, female and oolai an it gender neither male nor female) and survive by genetic manipulation and merging with other species in what they call the trade. They hope to trade with the recovered humans and repopulate the earth. Lilith has been chosen as one of the first to bond with the Oankali and eventually become the teacher of a group that they will awaken, train and send back to earth. It takes nearly 250 years of Lilith being in and out of suspended animation before they finish evaluating her for the task, and this book is divided into three distinct parts-the first covers her evaluation and training, the second the process of awakening the humans and Lilith trying to form them into a community aboard the ship, and the third their boot camp in a n area of the ship designed to emulate the tropical rainforests they will be settled in. Butler does a magnificent job of making the Oankali feel truly alien. A lot of aliens in sci-fi come across as essentially bipedal humanoids with a couple of odd features but feel like human societies with human motivations and thought just looking different (think most Star Trek or Star Wars aliens or even the greys from Close Encounters of the Third Kind), or as complete monsters like something out of a nightmare (think Xenomporphs from Alien/Aliens). The Oanklai are neither of these things. They feel other, but they are portrayed as a species with its own biology, psychology and culture. Butler also provides a thought-provoking examination of what it means to be human, as Lilith struggles through her experiences and the genetic enhancements she receives over time, and as she is pulled between and betwixt the community of the awakened humans she is mentoring/training and the Oankali she has lived with for an extended period. There are some significant time jumps between some chapters and between the first and second part of the book, and we do not witness every moment of Lilith's experiences and growth over the course of time, but we do experience her struggles and are caught up with anything that happens in those gaps, and it works well. I am not sure how to classify this-it's not space opera. There's not a lot of action, and definitely no adventure in it. It's not quite hard science fiction in that is doesn't extrapolate from existing tech to build it's future world, but it is much more in that vein that space opera. It's not quite post-apocalyptic in the traditional sense, it does deal with humanity after a nuclear war, but not with the decimated landscape of the earth itself. Wherever it falls in the land of labels though, it is a good read. It is well-written, thought-provoking and paints vivid characters who ring true and builds a world with a lot of verisimilitude for all its alieness. I plan on checking out the next book in the trilogy, but I may wait until I can find physical copies. I read this as an e-book form Hoopla on my desktop (I don't have an e-reading device or phone)so that wasn't the most pleasant reading experience on my eyes or my backside, though I may give it a go for book 2 as it will be a while before I acquire any new books. -M
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2020 2:23:51 GMT -5
Finished a reread of Raymond Chandler's The Long Goodbye... I first read it just before I moved out to Ohio, so late 2002/early 2003-ish. At that time, Chandler was my first dip of the toe into the detective genre since the Hardy Boys and Three Investigators books I read as a kid. I can't remember what set me onto Chandler at that point (it may have been reading Robert Anton Wilson stuff or other things I had been into previous to that, but I cannot recall for certain now some 15+ years later), but whatever it was, I am glad it did. It had been too long since I returned to Chandler and Marlowe, and this was the only book I had on hand, so I revisited it. The Long Goodbye remains my favorite Marlowe tale though. There's just so many layers to this story, so many twists and turns, so much depth to the characters and the world they live in, and so many interesting commentaries on the world, its philosophical underpinnings and the shortcomings of human nature and society. And I am as gleeful diving into Chandler's prose as Scrooge McDuck is diving into his money pit. While I adore the genre of detective fiction, there is just so much more to Chandler's stuff than just a genre work, and revisiting it this time I got so much more out of it when I thought I had gotten so much the first time I read it. I suspect there are more depths to plumb should I reread it again in a few years. -M
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 28, 2020 8:12:33 GMT -5
Much as I admire Hammett, I don't think anyone else can touch Chandler for this kind of stuff. He transcends the genre, as the saying goes. And so influential that later writers are often judged, consciously or not, by how good an imitation of his style they're able to come up with.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 28, 2020 8:25:48 GMT -5
I think you can make a good argument that The Long Goodbye is the best of the Marlowe novels. Chandler was a wordsmith par excellence. I don't think there's been a better stylist to work in the genre. That said, he was not great at plots and frequently bad at making sure that the plots made internal sense. But it really didn't matter because the writing was so damn good.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Apr 28, 2020 10:26:21 GMT -5
Much as I admire Hammett, I don't think anyone else can touch Chandler for this kind of stuff. He transcends the genre, as the saying goes. And so influential that later writers are often judged, consciously or not, by how good an imitation of his style they're able to come up with. My view is exactly the opposite: Hammett beats Chandler by a country mile, and also wrote more memorable stories. It's been years (over a decade) since I've read any of Hammett's novels, but I can still give you a rundown of the main plot points and individual, memorable scenes. I've read Chandler's Big Sleep and Long Goodbye more recently and while I thought they were fine while I was reading them, now I can barely recall anything about them.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 28, 2020 10:33:54 GMT -5
Much as I admire Hammett, I don't think anyone else can touch Chandler for this kind of stuff. He transcends the genre, as the saying goes. And so influential that later writers are often judged, consciously or not, by how good an imitation of his style they're able to come up with. My view is exactly the opposite: Hammett beats Chandler by a country mile, and also wrote more memorable stories. It's been years (over a decade) since I've read any of Hammett's novels, but I can still give you a rundown of the main plot points and individual, memorable scenes. I've read Chandler's Big Sleep and Long Goodbye more recently and while I thought they were fine while I was reading them, now I can barely recall anything about them. I love them both and probably couldn't pick a favorite if I tried. But what they excelled at were largely different aspects of writing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2020 14:39:25 GMT -5
I reread The Maltese Falcon last year, and have been reading a lot of detective and crime stuff over the last year or so, and Hammett and Chandler are the pinnacle (though I like Robert Parker and Spillane a lot too, but for different reasons). They are both incredible at what they do, but what they do are different animals. I like to liken it to the Beatles and the Stones-both are rock bands (or pop bands if you want to use that label), but the way they work within that genre is vastly different, but the results of both are no less spectacular for it. Chandler and Hammett both work within the detective genre, and each has his own strengths and weaknesses, their own quirks and stylings and both excel producing some of the best stuff in the genre and stuff that transcends the genre, but each is very different form each other. Which I prefer can vary depending on my mindset and worldview at the time, but both bring joy and enjoyment any time I read them.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 28, 2020 14:49:38 GMT -5
I reread The Maltese Falcon last year, and have been reading a lot of detective and crime stuff over the last year or so, and Hammett and Chandler are the pinnacle (though I like Robert Parker and Spillane a lot too, nut for different reasons). They are both incredible at what they do, but what they do are different animals. I like to liken it to the Beatles and the Stones-both are rock bands (or pop bands if you want to use that label), but the way they work within that genre is vastly different, but the results of both are less spectacular for it. Chandler and Hammett both work within the detective genre, and each has his own strengths and weaknesses, their own quirks and stylings and both excel producing some of the best stuff in the genre and stuff that transcends the genre, but each is very different form each other. Which I prefer can vary depending on my mindset and worldview at the time, but both bring joy and enjoyment any time I read them. -M I'm not a big fan of Parker but I've also read very little of his work. I love Spillane but I think that even he would admit that he was a stylist and not an artist. I think the closest there was to Hammett and Chandler (and I'm not remotely the first to say this) was Ross MacDonald. If anyone was able to distill the strengths that Hammett and Chandler had in their work into a cohesive synthesis it was probably MacDonald. I'm just not sure that his high notes were ever quite as high as either of them. Hammett ended up hating most of his work. But he was also a noted contrarian.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Apr 28, 2020 20:57:35 GMT -5
Up the Walls of the World 'James Tiptree' (Alice Sheldon)
I really had a hard time getting into this book... it took me FAR longer to read that it should have. There were some good interesting concepts presented, and some thought provoking scenes, but the plot really just didn't stay together as a coherent thing.
The three bits did come together, but there was no real purpose... things happened, yes, but it no questions were answered, and it's not clear what exactly was going on at any time.
It also found it quite difficult to visualize the Tyrians at first... there was plenty of description, but it wasn't until the humans got there that it really made sense to me. There was also quite a few typos, which didn't help.
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Apr 29, 2020 8:32:36 GMT -5
Finished The Hound of the Baskervilles, so I'm on schedule with my plan to read one classic of genre fiction a month. I had planned to read Zane Grey's Riders of the Purple Sage next, but I'm having second thoughts on putting that on my slate for May. In its favor, I can't think of any better known Western title in the public domain, but to its disfavor, a preview suggests that it's pretty virulently anti-Mormon. I'm not a Mormon, but I fear that sort of thing might prove distasteful at the least. Plus it looks pretty long. I don't mind a long book if I'm really enjoying it (Vanity Fair was a joy throughout!), but a long Western pushing propaganda intimidates me a little.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Apr 29, 2020 9:30:17 GMT -5
You might try Zane's The Last Trail. Kind of a pioneer romance with his ancestor as the expansion from the East into the West. Focus upon the Ohio valley with frontiersmen & military pushing into Indian territory. Was even made into film starring George O'Brien. Novel was written a few years before Riders of the Purple Sage.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 29, 2020 10:12:14 GMT -5
Finished The Hound of the Baskervilles, so I'm on schedule with my plan to read one classic of genre fiction a month. I had planned to read Zane Grey's Riders of the Purple Sage next, but I'm having second thoughts on putting that on my slate for May. In its favor, I can't think of any better known Western title in the public domain, but to its disfavor, a preview suggests that it's pretty virulently anti-Mormon. I'm not a Mormon, but I fear that sort of thing might prove distasteful at the least. Plus it looks pretty long. I don't mind a long book if I'm really enjoying it ( Vanity Fair was a joy throughout!), but a long Western pushing propaganda intimidates me a little. How did you like Hound, MW?
|
|