• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

Champions of Kyr'ith

Did you like this novel?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • No

    Votes: 2 66.7%

  • Total voters
    3

DeletedUser9519

Guest
Hello Elvenar Players,

I just finished reading an amazing book about elves that I bought at the L.A. Times Book Festival. I remember playing D&D back in the day and now with Lord of the Rings and other material that is out there. This is one of the best, hands down. So if you are into reading and like this genre, you have to read this book. You'll want to pass it on to family members too. I promise. It is more than just a good read.

Front_Cover_w_Spine 2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
Thanks for the recommendation. I tried Amazon's "look inside." There appears to be some strong world building and characters, and a possibly strong hand with subtle humor, but the writing is too choppy for me to enjoy, and it seriously violates the rule of show-don't-tell, with one paragraph picked randomly having the following sentences in order:
  • She heard...
  • She knew...
  • She descended....
  • She noticed...
  • She pulled out knives...
  • She climbed the tree...
  • The (people approaching) stopped...
  • They looked around to find her....
I'm afraid I'd be tearing my hair out even before I reached that point. It's disappointing when a writer with imagination and drive pushes themselves to publish before they've learned to write properly.
 

DeletedUser9519

Guest
Thanks for the recommendation. I tried Amazon's "look inside." There appears to be some strong world building and characters, and a possibly strong hand with subtle humor, but the writing is too choppy for me to enjoy, and it seriously violates the rule of show-don't-tell, with one paragraph picked randomly having the following sentences in order:
  • She heard...
  • She knew...
  • She descended....
  • She noticed...
  • She pulled out knives...
  • She climbed the tree...
  • The (people approaching) stopped...
  • They looked around to find her....
I'm afraid I'd be tearing my hair out even before I reached that point. It's disappointing when a writer with imagination and drive pushes themselves to publish before they've learned to write properly.

I see your point, but thats being a bit critical when you said the word strong twice in the same sentence. Plus many disagree about the show and tell rule you talk about. I'm about content personally, and the fault would be on the editor essentially, not the author. But you have a riveting arguement. Thanks.
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
I see your point, but thats being a bit critical when you said the word strong twice in the same sentence. Plus many disagree about the show and tell rule you talk about. I'm about content personally, and the fault would be on the editor essentially, not the author. But you have a riveting arguement. Thanks.
I wasn't attempting a review of the book, just indicating why I wouldn't be able to read it. Strong world building is not at all uncommon among creative people. It's what is most likely to lead someone to the decision to be an author. I used "possibly strong" about humor, because I saw a few lines that indicated an awareness of humor as a technique for shifting the tension. Many disagree that you must "always" show not tell, but with a very small number of exceptions (all of them giants in the field like Vonnegut and Gene Wolfe who can afford to use style in ways that most of us can't), no professional would argue that the majority of the action may be shown, not simply talked about. There was almost no true action in the available two chapters. Even things that appeared to be action, were mostly the author telling us something happened, as opposed to making us feel like we were part of what was happening.

I don't know anything about FirstEditing.com, but the only review I could find by a farmer employee is that they stressed quantity over quality and did not pay sufficiently to attract good editors. That said, the volume of issues is not something a professional editor would correct. The book requires improved writing skill, not editing. In the end, it doesn't matter if the editor was bad or the author was bad, the book that is published is the one that we get to read. It is not up to readers to say "I'm going to give you my money because I think this book would have been worth reading if you had a better editor."
 

DeletedUser9519

Guest
I wasn't attempting a review of the book, just indicating why I wouldn't be able to read it. Strong world building is not at all uncommon among creative people. It's what is most likely to lead someone to the decision to be an author. I used "possibly strong" about humor, because I saw a few lines that indicated an awareness of humor as a technique for shifting the tension. Many disagree that you must "always" show not tell, but with a very small number of exceptions (all of them giants in the field like Vonnegut and Gene Wolfe who can afford to use style in ways that most of us can't), no professional would argue that the majority of the action may be shown, not simply talked about. There was almost no true action in the available two chapters. Even things that appeared to be action, were mostly the author telling us something happened, as opposed to making us feel like we were part of what was happening.

I don't know anything about FirstEditing.com, but the only review I could find by a farmer employee is that they stressed quantity over quality and did not pay sufficiently to attract good editors. That said, the volume of issues is not something a professional editor would correct. The book requires improved writing skill, not editing. In the end, it doesn't matter if the editor was bad or the author was bad, the book that is published is the one that we get to read. It is not up to readers to say "I'm going to give you my money because I think this book would have been worth reading if you had a better editor."

Again, I think your being a bit critical. But at the same time you have very good points.
 

mucksterme

Oh Wise One
Again, I think your being a bit critical. But at the same time you have very good points.

It seems a bit contradictory to say it is one of the best books you ever read, then at the same time agree with Ashrem's criticism of the writing.
I haven't read the book but I think I would probably agree with Ash.
Sloppy writing tends to pull me out of the story.
What Ash is talking about are not things that writers should have to depend on editors for.
Just my two drachmas worth.
But thanks for the recommendation.
I can talk books all day.
Never looked, but if there isn't a book thread in "Off Topic", there should be.
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
Curious. Showed up. Named their account after the main character of a book. Asked one question. Made an avatar using part of a book cover. Advertised said book. Defended it strongly from any criticism. Then never logged in again after the next day.....
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser9469

Guest
Maybe... They were the writer trying to get their book sold...
Maybe... They were the publisher trying to fulfill a book deal...
Maybe... They got upset because you didn't like the writing style...

I would say #1 or #2 are the more likely... But could have been #3...

Maybe we should do a poll?:D
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
1) Seems possible, if not likely.
2) Is zero likely. AuthorHouse is a vanity press that doesn't provide anything you don't pay for, and would not create a game profile to advertise a book.
3) We had a private conversation about what I didn't like. Writing "style" is not a flaw. There are excellent authors who's style I dislike and I would not review them negatively for that (Stephen King, for instance). A lack of skill is a serious flaw if you want to publish. It's certainly possible that my criticism of the exhibited lack of skill could have offended the person. Especially if it was their own book and they were just pretending to be a keen reader to flog it to fans of elven-fantasy.
 

mucksterme

Oh Wise One
funny thing
i did some brief googling
i didn't see that user name or the post on any other forums
if that was the author trying to drum up business, they are bad at it
 

ajqtrz

Chef - loquacious Old Dog
Well, you do have to hand it to the writer, if it was he or she, for posting a "review" in an appropriate forum (or not, depending on you view of the whole self advertising idea)

In speaking of writing styles and the whole "show, don't tell" idea, I've found that there are at least two types of readers out there and the writing styles enjoyed by one is sometimes not always enjoyed by the other. The two styles reflected in "show" and "tell" focus the writing on the "experience" and the "plot" respectively. To some readers it is "what happens" and to find out they can endure a LOT of "tell." But to others it's the "show" because they wish to experience the emotional component of the story more than the denouement. Those who focus on experiencing are often "right brained" (which is better classified as 'metonymic') and those to whom plot is the point of the story are usually 'left brained' (i.e. metaphoric). In any case, if you are writing a story and want both types to read it, you have to make the plot MOVE and you have to dive deeply into the characters in order to make the reader FEEL.

A good example of what can be called a 'metonymic' book is "A Hundred Years of Solitude" by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. In the US Thomas Wolfe's "Look Homeward Angel" is a good start. You can add to the of metonymic style story telling anything by James Joyce ("Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man", "Ulysses", "Finigan's Wake"), William Faulkner, and many of the southern writers.

Against this you might consider metaphoric writers where the plot moves quickly (and thus you see more "tell" than "show" in most cases) to be authors like Rowling and just about any "adventure" writer, including Mark Twain, Danielle Steel, Isaac Asimov, and many, many others. It is interesting to note that current critical reviews tend to discount plot driven novels (though they are often more successful in the markets) than the metonymic types.

In any case, the point is that most books are not for everybody. Readers vary as much as writers and thus, you may like a book I detest and I may return the favor regarding one you like. It's all in why you read and why I do so too.

Just some thoughts.

AJ
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
Show-don't-tell can be violated freely by someone with skill. It's why I specifically said I'd never give a negative review for use of a writing style I don't like, and gave Stephen King as an example. I don't review his books because I don't like his writing style, but he writes well. When a person writes passively without getting an effect for the choice, that displays that they don't even know they are writing passively. That's not style, that's lack of style.

There are authors whose chosen styles infuriate me, and even so I read their books because they are doing something with that style. They are making a conscious choice to elicit a response. Neal Stephenson is one example. I really don't like his style, but his books are brilliant. I give him his head because I know it's going to pay off once I get a little way in. Gene Wolfe is a different category again, with purple prose and verbose writing that makes the story virtually impenetrable to someone who doesn't actively want to see where he's going. Also brilliant.

Edit: And, of course, Mervyn Peake of Chormenghast fame. I would literally rather vomit than try once more to read those books, yet I accept their brilliance and understand that for thousands of people they are a gem.
 
Top